CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED; 


STRICTURES  ON  THE  PECULIAR  TENETS 


ALEXANDER  CAMPBELL. 


BY    REV.    WILLIAM   PHILLIPS, 

LATE  ASSISTANT  EDITOR  OF  THE  WESTEBN    CHBISTIAN 
ADTOCATE. 


TO   WHICH  IS   PREFIXED 

A  MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR. 


CINCINNATI : 
PUBLISHED  BY  J.  F.  WRIGHT  &  L.  SWORMSTEDT, 

FOR  THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 

Stereotyped  by  J,  A.  James  &  Co. 

1837. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1837, 

By  J.  F.  WRIGHT  &  L.  SWORMSTEDT, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  for  the  District  Court  of  Ohio. 


Cincinnati :  Methodist  Book  Room. 
R.  P.  Thompson,  Printer. 


LIBKAKY 

jUNrv^ERsnr  of  cALTiOi  r^x 

SAxNTA  BARBARA 


ADVERTISEMENT. 


The  following  chapters  were  first  published  in  the 
Western  Christian  Advocate,  in  twenty-six  numbers. 
The  first  number  was  dated,  January  30th,  1835,  the  last 
appeared  in  April  1836.  In  consequence  of  the  estimation 
in  which  they  were  held,  many  persons  from  different  parts 
of  the  West,  requested  to  have  them  collected  and  pu-b- 
lished  in  a  volume.  The  Ohio  Conference  of  the  Metho- 
dist Episcopal  church,  at  its  last  session  held  in  Chilicothe, 
September  28th,  1836,  unanimously  requested  our  book 
agents  to  pubUsh  the  strictures  on  Campbellism,  as  they 
are  presented  in  this  volume,  now  before  the  reader. 

That  the  work  possesses  real  merit,  every  competent 
person  who  peruses  it,  will  freely  acknowledge.  It  must 
not,  however,  be  forgotten,  that  it  is  a  posthumous  work 
and  of  course  has  more  defects  than  though  it  had  issued 
from  under  the  author's  own  correcting  hand. 

Indeed  the  wrriter  did  notcontemplate;  that  what  passed 
from  his  pen,  in  the  haste  of  the  weekly  press,  would  af- 
terwards be  collected  and  formed  into  a  volume.  Had  he 
lived,  large  editions  would  have  been  made,  fewer  inac- 
curacies would  appear,  and  a  much  more  perfect  work 
would  now  be  presented  to  the  public.  As  it  is,  we  are 
fully  of  the  opinion  that  it  will  serve  as  a  timely  and  effi- 

iii 


4  ADVERTISEMENT. 

cient  check  on  one  of  the  most  pernicious  systems  of  the 
present  age,  though  couched  under  the  imposing  title  of 
the  Ancient  Gospel. 

The  editors  have  made  no  aherations  in  the  following 
pages  from  what  they  were  when  published  in  the  Western 
Christian  Advocate,  except  a  very  few  verbal  amend- 
ments, or  the  omission  of  those  concluding  or  introduc- 
tory clauses  in  the  nimibers,  by  which  they  are  reduced  to 
the  form  of  chapters  under  appropriate  heads.  A  table 
of  contents  is  also  added  which  the  reader  will  find  very 
convenient  as  an  aid  to  reference. 

C.  ELLIOTT. 
L.  L.  HAMLINE. 

Book  Room,  Cincinnati,  January,  1837. 


MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR. 


The  Rev.  William  Phillips,  author  of  the 
following  work,  was  born  of  pious  parents,  on 
the  7th  day  of  May,  1797,  in  Jessamine  coun- 
ty, state  of  Kentucky.  He  was  religiously 
educated,  was  frequently  impressed  with  the 
necessity  of  religion  in  early  life,  and  often 
thought  he  would  become  a  christian.  When 
he  was  a  youth,  after  laboring  through  the  day, 
he  would  spend  the  evening  in  writing  the  effu- 
sions of  his  mind,  both  in  poetry  and  prose. 
Many  pieces  of  these  early  productions  are  still 
in  possession  of  his  family.  When  he  arrived 
at  mature  age,  he  turned  his  attention  to  politi- 
cal affairs,  resisted  the  divine  impressions,  and 
abandoned  his  youthful  employments.  To  free 
himself  from  religious  restraint,  he  read  scepti- 
cal books,  till  infidel  sentiments  made  consid- 
erable impression  on  his  mind ;  though  he  still 
retained  a  high  regard  for  morality.  In  this 
state  of  mind  he  lived  till  he  was  settled  in  life, 
and  had  the  charge  of  a  rising  family.  The 
following  account  of  his  conviction  for  sin,  was 
related  by  himself  at  lovefeast,  as  a  part  of  his 
religious  experience,  and  communicated  to  us 
by  one  who  heard  him  at  the  time. 

"One  morning,"  said  he,  "I  returned  home 
in  a  melancholy  state  of  feeling,  after  having 
a2  5 


6  MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR. 

spent  the  night  from  home,  engaged  in  some 
political  feats.  I  took  my  seat  in  a  room  by 
myself.     Very  soon  my  eldest  son,  about  eight 

years  old,  came  to  me,  and  said,  B. has 

experienced  religion  ^  and  then  inquired,  TVhat 
is  religion  ?  Here  conviction  seized  my  mind, 
for  I  could  not  answer  the  questions  of  the 
child.  I  said, — Is  it  possible,  that  I,  who  was 
blessed  with  a  religious  education,  have  raised 
a  child  to  this  age,  who  inquires  of  me  what 
religion  is,  and  I  cannot  tell  him  !  I  then  re- 
solved to  reform  my  life,  and  examine  the  evi- 
dences of  Christianity." 

He  did  not,  like  too  many,  delay  this  great 
work,  but  set  about  it  with  his  usual  diligence. 
He  was  soon  thoroughly  convinced  of  the  divine 
reality  of  religion,  and  joined  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  Church,  as  a  seeker.  He  earnestly 
sought  the  Lord  with  bitter  sighs  and  tears  ;  but 
his  mourning  was  soon  turned  into  joy.  Five 
days  after  he  joined  the  church,  he  received 
the  evidence  of  his  acceptance,  at  Old  Fort 
meeting  house,  in  Montgomery  county,  Ky. 
It  was  manifest  to  all,  that  he  was  the  subject 
of  a  great  change.  He  shortly  after  felt  intense- 
ly the  worth  of  souls,  and  believed  that  he  was 
moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost  to  preach  the  gos- 
pel ;  of  which  he  afterwards  gave  ample  testi- 
mony. On  the  27th  of  December,  1828,  he 
was  licensed  to  preach  as  a  local  preacher,  by 
the  quarterly  meeting  conference  of  Mount 
Sterling  circuit.  In  this  capacity  he  labored 
with  success,  till  he  found  that  liis  field  of  labor 


MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR.  7 

was  too  circumscribed.  He  was  duly  recom- 
mended and  received  into  the  Kentucky  confer- 
ence in  the  fall  of  1831,  at  its  session  at  Lou- 
isville, after  he  had  labored  as  a  local  preacher 
for  nearly  three  years.  He  was  appointed  suc- 
cessively to  Winchester  and  Lexington  circuits, 
and  Newport  and  Covington  station ;  having 
been  reappointed  to  the  two  last  places,  so  as  to 
serve  each  two  years  in  succession,  except  the 
time  that  elapsed  between  his  appointm.ent  by 
the  General  conference  and  the  termination  of 
his  conference  year,  vvhich  was  still  shortened 
by  his  unexpected  death.  He  received  dea- 
con's and  elder's  orders  at  the  regular  periods 
in  which  these  offices  are  usually  conferred. 
He  performed  the  duties  of  assistant  editor  to 
the  Western  Christian  Advocate  one  year  be- 
fore he  was  appointed  to  that  office  by  the  suf- 
frage of  the  General  Conference  in  May,  1836. 
He  was  selected  by  this  body,  under  the  con- 
viction that  his  talents  and  attainments  qualified 
him  for  the  duties  of  an  editor,  and  in  full  ex- 
pectation of  much  efficient  editorial  usefulness. 
But  alas  !  hov/  uncertain  are  human  expecta-f 
tions.  For  tliree  weeks  and  two  days  only, 
after  the  adjournment  of  conference  was  he 
perm.itted  to  serve  the  church. 

On  the  22d  of  June,  1836,  he  was  confined 
to  bed  by  a  violent  attack  of  fever.  For  sever 
ral  days  previous  to  this,  he  felt  manifest  indi- 
cations of  an  approaching  assault  of  severe 
sickness.  During  his  confinement  of  six  weeks 
and  two  days,  he  suffered  much  pain  of  body, 


8  MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR. 

which  was  borne  with  great  patience.  When 
the  fever  was  high,  he  was  affected  with  deli- 
rium, but  when  the  fever  abated,  he  was  in  the 
full  exercise  of  his  mental  faculties.  Shortly- 
after  he  was  taken  ill,  he  gave  instructions  to 
his  afflicted  wife,  respecting  her  concerns  and 
future  residence,  intimating  to  her,  that  the 
present  disease  would  prove  fatal.  He  also 
called  his  children  to  his  bedside,  and  solemnly 
and  without  tears,  yet  deeply  affected,  gave 
them  the  charge  and  instructions  of  a  parent 
on  the  verge  of  eternity.  In  his  moments  of 
self-possession,  both  when  asked  and  unsoli- 
cited, he  expressed  himself  strongly,  yet  very 
humbly,  respecting  his  confidence  in  God  and 
the  enjoyments  of  religion,  which  he  evidently 
possessed  in  a  high  degree.  At  one  time,  when 
it  was  thought  he  was  dying,  he  was  asked, 
*'  If  all  was  well  ?"  he  calmly  replied,  "  I  feel 
for  me  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain." 
He  then  spoke  of  the  goodness  and  mercy  that 
had  followed  him  all  the  days  of  his  life.  At 
another  time,  when  he  complained  of  a  pain  in 
his  breast,  it  was  said  to  him,  "  when  we  get 
to  heaven  we  shall  then  be  done  suifering. 
Pain  and  affliction  will  be  over,  and  God  shall 
wipe  tears  from  every  eye.  Do  you  expect  to 
get  there?"  He  replied,  "Yes;  my  soul 
sometimes  exults  at  the  prospect."  And  with 
a  faultering  voice,  he  added,  "  Yes,  glory  to 
God."  At  another  time,  he  said  to  a  friend, 
*'  My  mind  is  entirely  at  peace.  It  is  doubt- 
ful whether  I  shall  recover  from  this  sickness  ; 


MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR.  9 

but  to  me  death  has  no  terror,  the  grave  no 
gloom.  If  it  were  the  Lord's  will,  I  would 
like  to  live,  that  I  might  make  some  better  pro- 
vision for  the  temporal  and  spiritual  welfare  of 
my  family.  But  why  do  I  talk  tlius  ?  The 
Lord  is  sufiicient,  I  now  wish  to  leave  this 
with  you  as  my  testimony,  that  my  hope  is  in 
Christ,  through  whose  blood  I  shall  conquer. 
I  now  feel  none  but  Jesus  can  do  suffering  sin- 
ners good."  Again  he  said,  "  In  retrospecting 
the  past,  contemplating  the  present,  or  looking 
forward  to  the  future,  I  have  nothing  to  fear." 
There  is  no  doubt  in  the  minds  of  any  of  his 
friends  concerning  his  triumphant  entrance  into 
the  paradise  of  God.  He  departed  this  life  on 
the  night  of  the  4th  of  August,  1836,  at  a  half 
past  twelve,  in  the  city  of  Cincinnati.  His 
remains  were  carried  to  Wesley  chapel  on  Sa- 
turday the  6th,  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  where  an 
impressive  sermon  was  delivered  by  the  Rev. 
J.  F.  Wright,  from  Psalms  46.  10.  "Be  still 
and  know  that  I  am  God."  His  body  is  de- 
posited in  the  Methodist  burying  ground,  till 
the  resurrection  of  the  just.  In  his  death,  the 
editorial  corps  has  lost  a  valuable  mem.ber,  and 
the  church  has  been  deprived  of  the  services 
of  one  of  her  most  faithful  and  efficient  sons. 

As  a  christian,  he  is  to  be  ranked  among  the 
excellent.  Entire  reliance  on  the  mercy  of 
God  and  the  vicarious  atonement  of  Jesus 
Christ,  v/as  the  strongest  and  most  prominent 
exercise  of  his  mind,  during  his  affliction  ;  and 
indeed  this  was  the  settled  disposition  of  his 
1  * 


10  MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR. 

very  soul,  from  the  time  he  first  embraced  re- 
ligion ;  but  which  increased  as  he  grew  in 
grace,  so  as  to  form  an  abiding  firm  exercise  of 
his  mind.  His  reliance  on  the  Redeemer  was 
such,  that, 

"  His  blood  and  righteousness 
He  made  his  only  plea." 

The  expression.  Lord  have  mercy,  which  he 
repeated  much  during  his  sickness,  indicated  to 
those  who  heard  him,  that  reliance  on  Jesus 
Christ  was,  with  him,  permanent  and  unwaver- 
mg.  In  patience  he  possessed  his  soul  to  such 
a  degree,  that  the  severest  pains  could  not  wrest 
a  murmur  from  his  lips. 

His  ministerial  gifts  and  qucdijications  were 
considered  to  be  of  the  most  useful  kind.  The 
following  extract  of  a  letter  from  an  aged  and 
experienced  member  of  the  church,  will  place 
the  ministerial  chai-acter  of  brother  Phillips  in 
a  very  amiable  light : — 

*'  While  we  would  cast  in  our  mite  in  honor 
of  his  christian  character,  and  for  the  encour- 
agement of  others  to  follow  his  example,  we 
being  intimately  acquainted  with  him  for  the 
two  years  he  travelled  Lexington  circuit,  Ky., 
our  house  being  almost  his  constant  home  once 
in  four  weeks,  as  he  traveled  round  his  circuit, 
and  we  who  have  been  acquainted  with  Meth-  ;: 
odist  preachers  for  near  fifty  years,  and  some  * 
of  us  strict  observers  of  men  and  things   for  \ 
more  than  forty  years,  are  more  than  willing  to  ^ 
give  in  our  testimony  to  the  christian  and  evan-  ;■ 


MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR.  1 1 

gelical  or  apostolical  character  of  brother  Phil- 
lips.    And  first,  a  more  pious,  studious,  grave, 
cheerful,  humble,  loving,  laborious   and  effec- 
tive preacher  we  have    never   known.     In    a 
word,  he  seemed  all  goodness,  not  only  for  a 
short  time,  (as  too  many  often  are)  but  all  the 
time  alike  good.     In  the   pulpit,  whether  the 
congregations  were  large  or  small,  he  was  like 
a  lamp  to  light  up  their  intellects.     His   doc- 
trines, so  pure  and  evangelical;  his  reasoning 
so  profound,  his  language  so  appropriate,  that 
all  acknowledged  him  much  of  a  master  work- 
man.    In  company  he  was  very  social    and 
friendly ;  in  our  family  he  was  always  instruc- 
tive ;   unto  the  aged  he  was  reverential ;    with 
the  young  he  was  familiar,  and  acted  much  of 
the  philosopher  ;  while   all  his  language   and 
deportment  seemed  seasoned  with  grace  and 
warm  affection.     We  recognize  him  this  mo- 
ment, fresh  in  our  memories.    His  almost  con- 
stant practice  in  the  winter  nights,  was  to  in- 
struct our  daughters  and  sons  in  the  rudiments 
of  singing,  as  also  in  the  way  of  salvation,  with 
several  other  branches  of  useful  instruction.  He 
often   put  us  in  mind  of  the    old   Methodist 
preacher,  that  some  of  us  knew  nearly  fifty 
years  ago  in  old  Virginia,  that  used  to  preach 
at  my  grandfather's.   We  were  acquainted  also 
with  the  circuit  preachers  that  preached  at  my 
father's  for  several  years  in  Kentucky,  where 
the  preachers  made  their  home.     Among  those 
preachers  were  but  few  Phillipses  to  be  found. 
For  twenty  years  or  more,  we  have  not  known 


13  MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR. 

a  more  excellent  and  profitable  man  than  brother 
William  Phillips.  But  he  is  gone  to  glory. 
Is  it  possible  that  we  are  to  hear  from  him  no 
more  this  side  of  heaven?" 

To  this  unadorned  and  simple  testimony 
other  accounts  precisely  correspond. 

His  attainments  as  a  writer  place  him  deser- 
vedly, if  not  among  the  foremost  writers,  at 
least  in  that  respectable  class  which  would  raise 
him  several  degrees  above  mediocrity.  But  as 
he  was  called  away  at  the  early  age  of  thirty- 
nine,  and  therefore  before  he  had  opportunity 
to  come  fairly  before  the  public,  it  would  be 
difficult  to  present  him  in  his  real  character  be- 
fore the  world.  His  writings  in  the  Western 
Christian  Advocate,  over  his  proper  signature, 
have  evident  marks  of  accurate  research,  sound 
judgment  and  respectable  attainments.  Had 
he  turned  his  attention  to  writing  at  an  earlier 
period  of  his  life,  or  had  Providence  spared  him 
longer,  he  would  probably  have  held  a  promi- 
nent place  among  the  writers  of  the  present 
age. 

Brother  Phillips  was  a  little  above  the  ordi- 
nary height,  and  rather  spare.  His  personal 
appearance  was  not  only  agreeable,  but  might 
be  considered  dignified.  His  manners  were 
courteous  and  pleasing,  manifesting  a  disposi- 
tion to  be  friendly  to  all ;  so  that  even  the 
stranger  was  often  prepossessed  in  his  favor ; 
but  he  was  respected  most  by  those  who  knew 
him  best.     He  was  truly  a  son  of  peace  ;   and 


MEMOIR  OF  THE  AUTHOR. 


13 


though  he  considered  it  his  duty  to  contend 
earnestly  for  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the 
saints,  he  delighted  not  in  controversy.  Yet 
into  this  he  was  willing  to  enter  sooner  than 
yield  up  any  portion  of  truth. 


B 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Introduction  of  the  subject — Mr.  Campbell's  doctrine  of 
Baptism  stated — Texts  brought  to  support  Campbellism 
considered,  viz.  Acts  ii.  38.  Jo.  iii,  5.  &c.  Mark  xvi. 
16.  1  Pet.  iii.  31.  Titus  iii.  21. 

Ours  is  a  fluctuating  world.  Its  fashions 
pass  away,  and  the  opinions  of  communities 
and  of  men  so  frequently  change,  that  old  things 
sometimes  become  new.  We  live  in  an  age 
when  some  of  the  errors  of  antiquity  have 
been  revived  and  remodeled,  and  forced  upon 
the  Avorld  under  the  imposing  name  of  "  the 
ancient  gospel ;"  but  more  commonly,  and  ap- 
propriately called  "  Campbellism,"  after  Mr. 
A.  Campbell,  their  chief  propagator.  And  as  this 
system,  which  is  in  reality  ''another  gospel,'' 
has  made  the  west  its  principal  theatre,  where, 
though  maimed  and  crippled,  it  is  still  strug- 
gling for  existence,  some  notice  of  it  may  not, 
perhaps,  be  "labor  in  vain."  The  present  is, 
therefore,  designed  as  the  Jirst  of  a  few  essays 
upon  this  subject. 

There  seems  a  remarkable  proneness  in  fall- 
en man,  to  make  "  the  kingdom  of  God  7neat 
and  drink,''  by  substituting  rites,  ceremonies, 
and  objects  of  sense,  for  spiritual  tlmigs,  and 

15 


16  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

spiritual  enjoyments.     That  man,  after  his  ex- 
pulsion  from  paradise,  retained  some  knowl- 
edge of  the  true  God,  is  a  reasonable  conclu- 
sion, and  is  clearly  deducible  from  the  1st  chap- 
ter of  the  epistle  to  the  Romans.     But  "  when 
they  knew    God,    they  glorified   him    not    as 
God."       The    idea  of  a    Spiritual   Being,  to 
whom  they  could  have  no  access  through  the 
medium  of  external  sense,  did  not  suit  their 
depraved  minds.     Hence,  forgetting  that  God, 
whom  they  could  not  see,  they  adored  the  sun, 
moon,  and    stars,    and  creeping  reptiles,   and 
graven  images,  which  they  could  see  and  feel. 
And  thus  it  is    probable   that  the  propensity 
above  mentioned,  led  the  world  into  idolatry. 
At  an  early  period  of  the  christian  church,  some 
of  the  fathers,  yielding  to  this  propensity,  en- 
deavored to  give  their  religion  a  degree  of  splen- 
dor, that  it  might  make  a  powerful  impression 
upon  the  senses  ;  but  their  efforts  corrupted  the 
pure  stream  of  gospel  truth,  and  marred  the 
beauty  and  spirituality  of  divine  worship.    Wit- 
ness, the  invocation  of  saints,  the  veneration  of 
relics,  and   the  use  of  pictures  and  images — 
things  unsanctioned  by  the  Word  of  God,  and 
tending  to  divert  the  mind  from  tlie  true  object 
of  worship.     Here  we  see  man'i^  disposition 
to  substitute  material  tlmigs  for  spiritual ;  and 
this  disposition,  aided,  perhaps,  by  a  too  literal 
interpretation  of  a  few  passages  of  Scripture, 
has  been  a  most  fruitful  source  of  error  to  the 
christian  church,  as  facts  developed  in  her  his- 
tory, abundantly  prove. 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  17 

The  Roman  Catholic  diurch,  receding  from 
the  simplicity  and  purity  of  worship,  as  taught 
in  the  Bible,  arrived  at  a  point  where  the  idea 
of  feeding  in  a  spiritual  manner,  by  faith, 
upon  the  broken  body  and  shed  hlood  of  our 
Lord,  was  too  refined  and  mysterious  for  her 
votaries  ;  and,  hence,  seizing  upon  the  Savior's 
words,  "  This  is  my  body — this  is  my  blood" 
—and  interpreting  them  to  mean  just  what 
they  say,  they  taught  that  the  consecrated  bread 
and  wine,  are  converted  into  the  real  and  lite- 
ral body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  so  that  the 
identical  body  which  had  been  born  of  the  Vir- 
gin Mary,  is  offered  by  the  priest  and  eaten  by 
the  communicants.  Thus  originated  transub- 
stantiation  in  the  13th  century — a  doctrine, 
which,  though  opposed  by  the  common  sense 
of  every  man,  and  the  obvious  import  of  Scrip- 
ture, is  still  retained  by  that  church. 

But  long  before  transubstantiation  was  heard 
of,  another  error,  originating  from  the  same 
fountain,  had  been  brought  into  the  church. 
Nicodemus  could  not  comprehend  how  a  man 
could  be  born  of  the  Spirit,  and  this  matter 
seems  to  have  been  equally  dark  and  mysteri- 
ous to  some  of  the  early  christians  ;  who  en- 
deavoring to  render  the  subject  tangible,  sought 
a  substitute  for  this  sjnritual  birth,  and  found 
it  in  water.  A  few  elliptical  phrases  and  sen- 
tences in  the  New  Testament,  such  as,  "be 
baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins" — "  be  bap- 
tized and  wash  away  thy  sins" — afforded  a 
pretext  for  this  change.  Thus  the  Scripture 
b2 


18  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSEP. 

doctrine,  of  justification  by  faith,  in  the  mer- 
its of  the  Kedeemer,  was  set  aside.  This  was 
one  of  the  first  departures  of  the  church  from  the 
sacred  truths  of  the  gospel,  and  to  this  vital  er- 
ror may  be  traced  much  of  that  ignorance  of 
spiritual  things,  and  that  intellectual  gloom 
Avhich  covered  the  church  in  the  dark  ages  of 
papal  supremacy. 

That  the  church  of  Rome,  (after  having  con- 
verted the  sacraments  into  inatter,  and  taught 
that  "  sensible  material  things,  work  by  the  A.1- 
mighty  power  of  God,")   should  receive  this 
view  of  the  efl[icacy  of  an  ordinance,  and  teach 
that,  "  baptism,  when  administered  by  a  priest 
having  a  good  intention,  of  itself  applies  the 
merits  of  Christ  to  the  person  baptized,  and 
washes  away  all  previous  sins,"  is  not  surpris- 
ing.    But  who  could  have  dreamed  that  a  Prot- 
estant   reformer,   in    the    nineteenth    century, 
claiming    exemption,  alike,   from  Catholicism 
and  "  sectarianism,"  would  rake  up  water  re- 
generation from  the  dregs  of  papal  rubbish, 
and  make  it  a  leading  feature  of  his  reforma- 
tion ?     This   Mr.   Campbell  has  done.     I  do 
not  assert  that  his  views  on  this  subject  are  pre- 
cisely those  of  the  Catholic  church,  but  they 
are  substantially  the  same.     Each  makes  bap- 
tism necessary  to  the  remission  of  sins — a  sine 
qua  non  in  the  salvation  of  man.     The  follow- 
ing quotations  from  Mr.  Campbell's  Millennial 
Harbinger — extra.  No.  1,  will  show  that  we  do 
not   misrepresent  him  :   "If  we  speak  Scrip- 
turally  we  must  use  these  terms  (immersion, 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  19 

regeneration,  and  conversion,)  as  all  descriptive 
of  the  same  thing."     "Remission  of  sins  can- 
not in  this  life  be  received  or  enjoyed  previous 
to  immersion."     "  Immersion  alone  is  the  act 
of  turning  to  God."     "  No  man  can  enjoy  the 
peace  of  God,  or  the  hope  of  heaven,  until  he 
is  immersed  for  the  remission  of  sins."     These 
assertions  clearly  make  baptism  a  saving  ordi- 
nance ;  and  I  know  not  that  any  Papist  ever 
used  stronger  language  in  pointing  out  its  im- 
portance.    And   it   is  well  known    that  these 
views  are  received  and  promulged  by  his  ad- 
herents ;    who,  universally,  urge  "  obedience''' 
(by   which    they   mean   immersion,)   as    the 
MEANS  of  obtaining  remission  of  sins.     Conse- 
quently, Mr.  C's  "  ancient  gospel"  is  literally 
a  gospel  of  ivater,  for  upon  its  principles,  with- 
out water  there  could  be  no  salvation  ;  and  his 
reformation,  taking  a  retrograde  direction,  goes 
back  to  embrace  a  radical  error,  which  before 
the  time  of  Luther,  had  almost  driven  the  spir- 
it of  Christianity  from  the  church ;  and  which, 
if  now  received,  must  reform  us  back  to  that 
gloomy  period,  and   enshroud  us  in  darkness, 
far  worse  than  that  which  came  upon  Egypt. 

The  writings  of  Mr.  Campbell  form  the  creed 
of  his  followers.  To  ascertain  his  opinion 
upon  any  fundamental  point,  is  to  learn  theirs. 
The  quotations  already  made,  show  his  views 
of  baptism  to  be  nearly  related  to  the  Papisti- 
cal notion  of  the  "  opus  operatum'''  of  the  sac- 
raments; but,  to  make  "assurance  doubly 
sure,"  and  for  the  information  of  those  who 


20  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

may  not  have  been  favored  with  this  new  ver- 
sion of  Popery,  the  following  additional  quota- 
tions, from  his  "  Millennial  Harbinger,"  are  pre- 
sented :  "  It  is  not  our  faith  in  God's  promises 
of  remission,  but  our  going  down  into  the  wa- 
ter, that  obtains  the  remission  of  sins. ^^  "  Im- 
mersion is  the  means  divinely  appointed  for 
our  actual  enjoyment  of  this  first  and  greatest 
of  blessings."  The  reader  will  understand 
that  the  great  blessing  mentioned  here  is  jus- 
tification or  remission  of  sins.  And  this,  we 
are  told,  is  to  be  obtained  by  "  going  down  into 
the  water." 

Now  it  is  not  intended  in  these  essays  to 
give  a  higher  coloring  to  any  feature  of  Camp- 
bellism,  than  his  writings,  and  the  practice  of 
his  adherents  will  warrant.  Such  an  attempt 
would  do  them  injustice,  and  could  only  result 
in  the  mortification  and  disgrace  of  the  writer. 
Mr.  Campbell  is  not,  therefore,  charged  with 
placing  the  efficacy  of  baptism  in  the  intentio)i 
of  the  baptizer,  or  with  teaching  that  baptism, 
of  itself,  literally  washes  away  sin,  and  cleanses 
the  soul.  These  notions  are  not  his ;  and  he 
has  enough  to  answer  for  without  bearing  the 
sins  and  absurdities  of  others.  He  believes, 
or  afl^ects  to  believe,  that  baptism  is  the  means 
through  which  justification  is  extended  to  the 
sinner ;  and  that  we  are  only  authorized  to 
expect  pardon  in  this  act  of  obedience.  Soph- 
istry, itself,  cannot  torture  his  language,  in  the 
above  quotations,  into  any  thing  lower  than  is 
here  stated;    nor  will  the   attempt  be  made; 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  21 

for  it  is  well  known  that  his  followers  uni- 
formly proclaim,  remission  of  sins  through 
baptism,  as  the  burden  of  their  song-.  And 
now,  his  belief  on  this  point  being  settled,  we 
join  issue.  He  affirms,  we  deny.  And  not- 
withstanding the  difficulties  often  attendant 
upon  efforts  for  the  establishment  of  a  negative, 
we  feel,  in  this  case,  fully  competent  to  the 
task.  But,  in  order  that  the  mind  of  the  read- 
er may  see  the  extent  of  its  claims,  and  be 
the  better  prepared  for  its  refutation,  we  pro- 
pose, first  of  all,  an  examination  of  those  texts 
of  Scripture  upon  which  his  doctrine  mainly 
depends  for  its  establishment. 

The  point  before  us  is  the  principal  arch  in 
the  superstructure  of  Campbellism ;  and  the 
keystone  of  this  arch  is  found  in  Acts,  ii,  38. 
"  Repent  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."  From  the  expression,  "  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,"  it  is  argued  that  baptism  is  the 
means  of  obtaining  this  blessing.  Much  stress 
is,  also,  laid  on  the  circumstances  and  situation 
of  Peter  when  he  spoke  these  words.  To  him, 
it  is  said,  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  had  been 
committed,  that  acting  under  the  authority  of  the 
King,  he  was  then  opening  its  door  for  the 
world  to  enter  in ;  and  hence,  that  his  v/ords 
are  entitled  to  no  ordinary  degree  of  credit.  Be 
it  so.  We  neither  wish  to  detract  from  the  im- 
portance of  the  occasion,  nor  to  question  the 
correctness  of  the  instructions.     But  none  of 


22  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

these  proves  that  Peter  taught  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  what  Campbellites  teach  now  ;  nor 
is  it  at  all  probable  that  the  Jews,  familiar  with 
the  writings  of  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  would 
thus  understand  him. 

An  elliptical,  or  abbreviated  form  of  speech, 
was  common  among  the  Jews,  and  abounds  in 
the  Scriptures ;  so  that  many  phrases  and  sen- 
tences, taken  literally,  would  convey  a   mean- 
ing false  and  foolish,  and  never  designed  by 
those  who  used   them.     Some  have  supposed 
this   mode  of  speech   to  have  originated  from 
the  fact,  that  there  is  no  term  in  the  Hebrew 
language  which  expresses  to  signify  or  denote. 
But,  be   this  as  it  may,  the  existence  of  this 
manner  of  speaking  is  unquestionable.     Take, 
for  example,  the   following  Scriptures  :    "Tlie 
three  baskets  are   three   days,"   Gen,   xl.   18. 
"  The  ten  horns  are  ten  kings,"  Dan.  vii.  24. 
"The    field   is    the   v/orld,"   Matt.    xiii.    38. 
"  The  seven  candlesticks  are  the  seven  church- 
es," Rev.  i.  20.     "  This    is  my  body,"  and 
"  this  is  my  blood,"  Matt.  xxvi.  26.  27.  Such 
expressions,  very  common  in  both  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments,  cannot  be  undexstood  in  a 
literal  sense.    The  most  ordinary  reader,  seeing 
the  folly  of  a  literal  interpretation,  will  under- 
stand the  substantive  verbs  according  to  the  He- 
brew idiom  :   "  The  three  baskets  signify  three 
days."    "  The  field  represents  the  world." 

Now  the  language  of  Peter  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost,  is  somewhat  in  character  with  the 
above  passages,  and  is  susceptible  of  a  similar 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  23 

interpretation.  Hence  we  may  understand  him 
as  saying,  "  be  baptized  to  represent  remission 
of  sins."  Tliis  interpretation  cannot  be  called 
unreasonable.  The  character  of  the  speaker  and 
the  hearers,  and  the  nature  of  the  discourse, 
combine  to  prove  its  correctness.  He  and  they 
were  Jews.  It  was  natural  for  him  to  adopt 
this  short,  elliptical  phraseology  of  his  nation ; 
and  equally  natural  for  them  to  hear  by  the 
same  rule.  Moreover,  they  had  been  reared 
in  the  observance  of  a  religion  burdened  with 
rites  and  ceremonies,  some  of  which,  looking 
back,  represented  events  that  were  past,  while 
others,  taking  a  prospective  view,  pointed  out 
things  to  come.  And  these  sacrifices,  though 
offered  for  the  sins  of  the  people,  were  not 
intended  to  take  away  sin ;  but  only  to  repre- 
sent a  better  sacrifice,  and  point  out  their  de- 
pendence on  Him  for  remission.  With  this 
knowledge,  and  under  all  these  circumstances, 
the  multitude  listen  to  Peter's  discourse.  He 
is  unfolding  a  new  dispensation  of  the  king- 
dom of  God,  which,  like  the  former,  has  its 
appropriate  rites  and  ordinances.  He  com- 
mands baptism  "for  the  remission  of  sins." 
They  know  the  meaning  of  the  sin-offerings 
of  their  religion ;  they  understand  the  emblem- 
atical import  of  its  rites  and  sacrifices;  and, 
above  all,  they  are  Hebrews,  familiar  with  the 
idiom  of  their  nation,  and  know  the  true  sense 
and  force  of  its  expressions.  From  all  which, 
it  is  clear  that  they  received  baptism  according 


24  CAMPBELLISM    EXP06ED. 

to  the  above  exposition  to  represent,  or  in  ref- 
erence to  the  "remission  of  sins." 

The  words  of  Ananias  to  Saul,  "  Arise,  and 
be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins,  calling 
on  the  name  of  the  Lord,"  are,  also,  appealed 
to  in  support  of  ivater  regeneration  ;  but  they 
afford  it  no  more  support  than  the  former,  be- 
ing subject  to  the  same  rules  of  interpretation. 
Further  evidence  might  be  adduced  in  favor  of 
the  construction  we  have  given  to  these  texts. 
It  would  be  easy  to  show  that  it  is  not  forbid- 
den, even  by  the  genius  of  our  own  language. 
But  brevity  is  our  object. 

Furthermore,  whatever  may  be  the  force  and 
value  of  the  foregoing  interpretation,  one  thing 
is  certain,  that  faith  is  represented  in  scripture 
as  the  great  means  of  justification.  And  this  is 
plainly  implied  in  the  text  and  expressed  in 
the  context.  It  is  embraced  in  the  words,  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ ;  because  this  ex- 
pression plainly  implies  that  those  who  are  bap- 
tized in  or  into  his  name,  are  believers  in  Christ. 
The  thing  is  clearly  expressed.  *'  Then  they 
that  gladly  received  i.  e.  believed  his  word  were 
baptized."  verse  41.  And  they  are  spoken  of 
after  their  baptism  as  persons  who  believed, 
verse  44.  For  though  on  their  repenting  and 
believing,  they  were  according  to  the  tenor  of 
the  gospel  covenant,  entitled  to  the  forgiveness 
of  their  sins  ;  they  are  here  called  on  to  repent 
and  submit  to  the  ordinance  of  baptism  in  or- 
der to  receive  the  same  blessing  of  pardon  or 
justification.     And  we  have  seen  already  that 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  25 

faith  was  presupposed.  Christ,  for  wise  rea- 
sons in  receiving  baptism  appointed  this  solemn 
rite  as  a  tolven  of  their  taking-  up  the  christian 
profession  in  a  public  manner,  and  there  could 
not  be  any  sufficient  evidence  of  the  truth  of 
their  repentance  and  faith,  if  this  precept  of 
Christ  had  not  been  obeyed.  But  the  absur- 
dity of, Mr.  Campbell's  interpretation  of  this 
passage,  by  which  faith  and  true  repentance  are 
substantially  rejected,  will  appear  in  the  future 
treatment  of  this  subject,  Avhere  justification 
by  faith  will  be  established,  and  baptism  itself 
rescued  from  the  perverting  use  to  v/hich  it  is 
employed  in  the  New  C4ospel  proclaimed  first 
at  Bethany. 

The  views  we  hav«  given  of  Acts  ii.  38,  are 
believed  to  be  the  primary  meaning  of  the  text. 
To  adopt  the  Campbellite  assumption,  that 
"  the  Scriptures  tnmn  ivhat  they  say,  and  say 
what  they  mean,''''  and  hence,  from  the  phrase, 
"  for  the  remission  of  sins,"  to  argue  that  Pe- 
ter taught  that  pardon  could  only  be  had 
through  baptism,  would  drive  us,  at  once,  into 
the  absurd  fiction  of  transubstantiation.  That 
they  stand  pretty  much  upon  the  same  ground; 
that  the  Romanist  has  as  much  authority  for 
the  ''''  real  presence,''''  as  Mr.  Campbell  has  for 
his  notions  of  baptism,  and  that  the  mode  of 
interpretation  resorted  to  for  the  establishment 
of  the  latter,  would  prove  equally  formidable 
in  behalf  of  the  former,  are  all  unquestionable. 
And  further,  we  remark,  that  Campbell's  meth- 
od of  obtaining  remission  of  sins,  contradicts 
2  C 


26  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

a  large  portion  of  the  New  Testament,  and 
thereby  involves  Christianity  itself  in  inextrica- 
ble difficulties.  This  will  be  shown  in  the 
progress  of  these  strictures. 

But  though  the  first  and  principal  design  of 
baptism,  as  the  initiatory  rite,  is  to  denote  or 
represent  the  washing  away  of  sin,  "  by  the 
Spirit  of  our  God  ;"  yet,  this  is  not  its  only 
design.  It  is,  also,  a  means  of  grace  ;  and  in 
a  subordinate  sense,  may  be  administered,  lite- 
rally, "  for  the  remission  of  sins."  It  is  in  the 
performance  of  duty,  and  not  in  neglect  of  it, 
that  we  are  authorized  to  expect  the  favor  of 
God.  Hence,  we  repent,  pray,  confess  to  God, 
are  baptized,  and  receive  the  sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  supper  "  for  the  remission  of  sins  ;"  and 
perform  every  other  known  duty  in  reference 
to  the  same  object.  But  having  obeyed  in  all 
these,  we  are  taught  not  to  trust  in  any  one  of 
them,  nor  in  all  of  them,  but  to  look  to  a  high- 
er source,  and  through  another  means,  for  the 
enjoyment  of  this  greatest  of  present  blessings. 
Indeed,  our  justification  does  not  depend  so 
much  upon  Mr.  Campbell's  institution  for  the 
remission  of  sins,  as  upon  either  repentance  or 
prayer. 

Religious  truth  is  of  all  things  the  most  im- 
portant;  because  it  involves  the  concerns  of 
eternity.  Campbellism  claims  to  be  the  truth, 
"  the  ancient  gospel ;"  and  its  devotees,  pro- 
fessing to  take  ''the  Book"  alone  for  their 
guide,  proclaim  baptism,  as  the  only  appointed 
means  for  obtaining  remission  of  sins.     This 


CAMPEELIJSM    EXPOSED.  2  4 

doctrine,  if  ti'tte,  ought  to  be  known;  and  if 
false,  it  ought  to  be  exposed,  for  the  salvation 
of  immortal  souls  is  connected  with  it.  We 
wish  to  learn- its  true  character,  and,  therefore, 
continue  the  investigation  of  its  claims  to  the 
sanctions  of  Scripture. 

Two  of  the  main  props  of  this  doctrine  were 
formerly  considered,  and  found  not  to  sustain 
it.  The  following  are,  also,  pleaded  in  its  be- 
half; let  us  see  if  they  will  be  more  successful  : 
"  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the 
Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
God,"  John  iii.  5.  "  He  that  believeth  and  is 
baptized  shall  be  saved,"  Mark  xvi.  16.  "The 
like  figure  whereunto  even  baptism  doth  also 
now  save  us,"  I  Peter  iii,  21.  In  the  first  of  these 
quotations  a  birth  of  water  is  made  necessary 
in  order  to  our  entering  "  the  kingdom  of  God," 
and  in  the  last  two,  a  saving  virtue  seems  to  be 
attached  to  baptism  ;  and  hence,  Campbellites 
infer,  that  "  remission  of  sins"  can  only  be  had 
through  immersion.  But  were  we  to  admit,  as 
assumed  in  the  premises,  that  baptism  is  indis- 
pensable for  the  salvation  of  the  soul,  and  in 
order  to  its  admission  into  the  kingdom  of  glo- 
ry, it  certainly  could  not  lead  necessarily  to  the 
conclusion,  that  it  is  the  means  of  justification; 
for  as  justification,  or  remission  of  sins  is  not 
the  only  prerequisite  to  the  enjoyment  of  hea- 
ven, baptism,  though  necessary  for  that  enjoy- 
ment, might  be  designed  for  a  different  purpose. 
But  the  premises  and  the  inference  are  alike 
inadmissible.     To  suppose  that  God  has  made 


28  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

the  eternal  happiness  of  man  so  precarious,  that 
it  depends  upon  an  ordinance,  the  performance 
of  which  is  often  inexpedient,  and  sometimes 
impossible,  is  repugnant  to  Scripture  facts,  and 
derogatory  to  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  the 
Divine  Being. 

But  if  salvation  can  be  had  without  baptism, 
how  are  we  to  understand  the  above  texts  ?  To 
understand  the  Savior's  meaning,  when  he  con- 
nects water  with  the  Spirit  as  necessary  to 
entering  "  the  kingdom  of  God,"  we  must  con- 
sider that  the  phrase  "  kingdom  of  God"  is 
variously  applied  in  the  Scriptures.  Camp- 
belKtes  Avill  readily  admit  that  it  signifies  the 
church  on  earth  ;  and  St.  Paul,  when  he  says, 
"  that  flesh  and  blood  cannot  inherit  the  king- 
dom of  God,''''  clearly  applies  it  to  the  church 
in  heaven.  And  as  the  apostle  tells  us  in  the 
third  chapter  of  Ephesians,  that  the  church  in 
heaven  and  that  on  earth  make  hut  one  family, 
we  are  authorized  to  conclude,  that  the  Savior 
embraces  both  of  these  imports  in  the  phrase, 
"  kingdom  of  God."  This  premised,  his  mean- 
ing is  obvious.  The  church  needs  a  badge  of 
discipleship,  a  visible  line,  or  mark  to  separate 
her  members  from  the  world.  This  she  has 
in  baptism  ;  and  consequently,  baptism  becomes 
necessary  in  order  to  exhibit  to  others  our  faith 
in  Christ,  and  externally  to  entitle  us  to  the 
immunities  of  the  church.  This  ordinance  is, 
therefore,  important,  both  in  its  symbolic  char- 
acter, as  representing  the  washing  away  of  sin, 
and  as  the  initiatory  rite,  conferring,  so  far  as 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  29 

man  can  judge,  the  privilege  of  cliiirch  mem- 
bership. The  church  can  only  receive  us 
through  baptism;  and  hence,  this  ordinance  is 
necessar}'  to  our  entering  "  the  kingdom  of 
God,"  the  visible  church.  But  this  institution 
and  the  privileges  it  confers,  are  external ;  and 
though  necessary  for  the  church  on  earth,  do  not 
regenerate  the  soul,  or  prepare  it  for  the  king- 
dom in  heaven.  This  is  the  work  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  not  of  water ;  therefore,  in  the  verses 
that  follow  the  text,  the  Savior,  dropping  all 
allusion  to  the  water,  urges  the  necessity  of  be- 
ing "born  of  the  Spirit,"  and  illustrates  the 
nature  of  this  birth.  Thus,  ''  the  kingdom," 
in  one  sense,  implying  the  church  below,  and 
baptism  being  the  visible  sign  of  entrance,  we 
see  why  the  Savior  said,  "except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  God  ;"  and,  also,  that  the  necessity  for  this 
birth  would  remain,  though  it  were  destitute 
of  a  spiritual  meaning,  and  in  no  sense  a  means 
of  grace. 

Keeping  these  remarks  before  him,  the  read- 
er Avill  readily  comprehend  the  other  quota- 
tions. "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall 
be  saved."  Baptism  here,  cannot  be  under- 
stood as  being  the  means  of  spiritual  regenera- 
tion, because  the  aposde  expressly  declares, 
"  whosoever  helieveih  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ, 
is  born  of  God."  Now  men  may  certainly 
believe  this  before  they  are  baptized  ;  but  "who- 
soever believeth"  it  "is  born  of  God;"  of 
course,  baptism  is  not  the  means  of  this  spirit- 
c  2 


30  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

ual  birth.  "  He  that  beUeveth"  "  with  the 
heart  unto  righteousness,"  is  justified,  and  sa- 
ved from  the  guiU  of  sin  ;  but  he  is  not  saved 
externaliy — he  lacks  the  seal,  and  neither  the 
church  nor  the  world  can  recognize  him  as  a 
member  of  the  kingdom,  till  he  enters  by  the 
door  of  baptism. 

These  observations,  applying  with  equal 
force  to  the  often  quoted  passage  from  Peter, 
may  be  thought  to  render  further  remarks  un-  - 
necessary  ;  but  here  we  wish  to  be  a  little  more, 
definite.  When  Peter  says,  ''-  the  like  figure 
whereunto  baptism  doth  now  save  us,"  he  calls 
baptism  a  figure  or  emblem.  If  it  be  a  "  fig- 
ure," the  salvation  it  brings  can  only  be  figura- 
tive, not  real  and  literal.  The  figure  of  a  man 
cannot  perform  his  work.  All  that  it  can  do, 
is  to  represent  his  appearance  and  actions. 
Consequently,  baptism,  as  a  figure,  can  only 
*'  save  us"  in  a  figurative,  or  emblematic  sense, 
by  separating  us  from  the  world,  and  pointing 
out  remission  of  sins  by  the  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  baptism  of  water,  then,  bears 
the  same  relation  to  the  visible  church,  that  the 
baptism  of  the  Spirit  does  to  the  invisible. 
Without  the  former,  the  sign  and  figure^  no 
person  can  be  received  as  a  legitimate  subject 
of  the  visible  kingdom  ;  so,  also,  without  the 
latter,  the  thing  signijied,  no  person  can  belong 
to  the  invisible,  or  spiritual  kingdom. 

One  remark  to  prevent  misunderstanding.  In 
speaking  of  baptism  as  necessary  to  induct  us 
into  the  church,  we  do  not  mean  immersion, 


CAMPEELLISM    EXPOSED.  31 

iior  do  we  exclude  it.  Our  business,  at  pre- 
sent, is  not  with  the  mode.  We  mean  the  ap- 
plication of  water,  by  pouring  or  otherwise,  by 
pji  authorized  minister,  in  the  names  of  the  sa- 
cred Trinity. 

Another  passage  relied  upon  in  favor  of  ivater 
regeneration,  is  Titus  iii.  5  :  "  Not  by  works 
of  righteousness  which  we  have  done,  but  ac- 
cording to  his  mercy  he  saved  us,  by  the  wash- 
ing of  regeneration,  and  renewing  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;    which   he    shed    on    us    abundantly, 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Savior."     This  text 
is  adduced  in  proof  of  Mr.  Campbell's  asser- 
tion, that  "  regeneration  and  immersion  are  two 
names  for  the  same  thing  ;"  and  hence  the  in- 
ference that  we  are  saved  by  immersion.     But 
it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  this  passage  has 
any  allusion  to  immersion,  or  to  water  baptism 
in  any  other  mode.     The  latter  clause  of  the 
quotation,  "  which  he  shed   on  us,"  teaches 
that  we  are  saved  by  something  "  shed,"  or 
poured  out  upon  us ;  and  this   cannot  be  im- 
mersion.    We  are  aware,  however,  that  Mr. 
C.  would  have  us  confine  the  relative  "  which" 
to  the  "renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost;"  but 
there  is  no  good  reason  for  this.     Indeed,  ac- 
cording to  his  own  argument  on  another  text, 
and  for  a  different  purpose  the  relative  "which" 
must  here  be  confined  exclusively  to  the  "  wash- 
ing of  regeneration ;"  and,  consequently,  the 
notion  of  immersion  is  entirely  excluded  from 
the  passage.    But  there  is  not  sufficient  ground 
for  confining  the  relative  to  either  of  the  pre- 


33  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

ceding  clauses,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  other. 
It  most  probably  takes  for  its  antecedents,  both 
"  the  v/ashing"  and  the  "  renewal,"  and  hence, 
the  washing,  b}^  which  we  are  saved,  is  pour- 
ed out  upon  us  by  the  Holy  >Spirit. 

But  granting  the  possibility  that  there  is  in 
this  passage  an  aluision  to  th^  application  of 
water  in  baptism,  wliat  is  the  conclusion  ? 
That  "baptism  is  inseparably  connected  with 
remission  of  sins,"  and  that  it  is  another  term 
for  regeneration  ?  Certainly  not.  No  man  in 
his  senses,  whose  mind  was  uninfluenced  by 
the  dogmas  of  the  Pope  of  Rome,  could  arrive 
at  such  a  conclusion.  The  allusion  to  baptism, 
if  there  be  any  in  the  text,  is  found  in  the  word 
"washing."  Let  it  be  conceded  that  this 
means  baptism.  It  is  called  "  the  washing  of 
regeneration;"  therefore,  Campbellites  would 
have  us  believe,  that  baptism  and  regeneration 
mean  the  same  thing.  And  thus,  by  a  process 
unknown  to  all  but  themselves,  the  ivashing 
becomes  the  thing  iv ashed ;  and  the  act  of 
cleansing  a  garment  is  converted  into  the  gar- 
ment itself !  Truly  such  logic  is  as  superla- 
tively ridiculous  and  incomprehensible,  as  the 
nonsensical  jargon  of  a  Mormonite's  unknown 
tongue. 

The  absurdity  of  the  attempt  to  prove  from 
this  text,  the  sameness  of  baptism  and  regene- 
ration, is  too  glaring  to  require  a  serious  refu- 
tation ;  and  to  take  the  phrase  literally,  and 
suppose  that  the  noun,  "regeneration,"  re- 
quires to  be  washed,  would  involve  an  equal 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  33 

absurdity.  Upon  the.  supposition,  then,  that 
the  passage  has  any  reference  to  baptism,  the 
only  rational  conclusion  is,  that  the  "  washing 
of  regeneration,"  implies  a  ivashing  in  refer- 
ence to  regeneration;  and  hence,  we  arrive  at 
our  former  definition  of  the  design  of  baptism ; 
that  it  represents  remission  of  sins  "by  the  re- 
newing of  the  Holy  Spirit,  shed  on  us  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Savior." 

And  now,  reader,  we  have  exam.ined  the 
principal  texts,  upon  which  the  notion  of  re- 
mission of  sins,  through  baptism,  depends  for 
its  support.  The  examination  has  shown  that 
they  liave  very  little  of  the  appearance,  and 
nothing  of  the  reality  of  that  doctrine  in  them. 
These  Scriptures  are  its  main  dependence  ; 
they  do  not  sustain  it,  nor  can  it  be  sustained 
from  the  Bible,  What,  then,  has  given  it  cur- 
rency, and  kept  it  alive  thus  far  ?  Let  those 
who  are  familiar  with  the  cunning  sophistry  of 
A. 'Campbell,  and  the  bold  dogmatism  of  his 
coadjutors,  answer  the  question. 

Having  said  that  the  Scriptures  we  have  no- 
ticed, are  the  principal  props  of  this  doctrine,  it 
may  be  necessary  to  observe  that  they  are  not 
all.  We,  it  is  true,  have  been  able  to  discern 
nothing  else  that  seems  to  bear  any  resemblance 
to  it,  nor  do  we  recollect  that  Mr.  Campbell 
claims  more  ;  but  some  of  his  followers  have 
had  their  mental  optics  so  strengthened  by  the 
light  of  this  new  gospel,  ^s  to  discover  proofs 
of  water  regeneration  everywhere.  For  instance, 
one  of  these  knowing  ones^  having  read  in  the 
2* 


34  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

first  cnapter  of  Genesis,  that  *'  the  Spirit  of 
God  moved  upon  the  face  of  the  waters,"  finds 
it  an  irresistible  proof  of  this  doctrine,  and  pro- 
claims that  '*  the  Spirit  which  moved  on  the 
face  of  the  waters  in  the  beginning,  has  never 
left  them,  and  that  those  who  rise  from  '  the 
womb  of  waters,'  instantaneously  inhale  that 
Spirit."  And  another  of  the  same  scliool  tells 
his  hearers,  that  "  ivater  was  not  included  in 
the  curse  pronounced  by  the  Creator  at  man's 
expulsion  from  paradise  ;  and  this  is  clear  proof 
that  water  was  designed  to  be  the  means  of  our 
restoration  to  the  image  and  favor  of  God." 
But  leaving  the  reader  to  determine  whether 
these  champions  of  reform  have  not  got  ahead 
of  their  Master,  we  close  for  the  present. 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  35 


CHAPTER  II. 

FAITH. 

Introduction — literal  meaning — Baptism,  prayer  and  con- 
fession as  conditions  of  justification — justification  by 
faith  alone — justifying  faith  as  combining  reliance  and 
trust  with  assent — faith  as  connected  with  pardon  does 
not  include  Baptism  or  other  works — faith  of  Abraham 
considered — objections  against  the  doctrine  of  faith  as 
tho  condition  of  justification. 

The  reader  will  bear  in  mind  that  the  con- 
dition on  which  remission  of  sins  is  offered  to 
the  human  family,  is  still  before  us.  It  has 
been  shown  that  Campbell  and  his  followers 
proclaim  immersion,  as  this  condition  ;  and  we 
have  said  that  they  consider  it  the  only  means 
of  obtaining  this  blessing.  But  knowing  that 
he  has  published  ministers  who  oppose  his  re- 
formation, as  "  licensed  slanderers,^''  and  thathis 
satellites  are  famous  for  endeavoring  to  excite 
public  sympathy,  by  crying  out,  "  misrepre- 
sentation and  persecution,"  and  above  all,  wish- 
ing to  do  no  man  injustice,  we  pause  to  explain. 

The  views  of  Mr.  Campbell,  as  we  under- 
stand them,  do  in  reality  exclude  both  repent- 
ance and  faith  (such  as  the  Scriptures  require), 
from  having  any  thing  to  do  with  obtaining  re- 
mission of  sins  ;  but  we  wish  our  readers  to 
understand  that  he  speaks  of  something  he  calls 
faithi  and    reformation^   as  necessary  to  ac- 


36  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

''company  immersion.  And  further,  we  wouldjl 
not  be  understood  to  insinuate  that  he  considers  ! 
immersion  as  the  procuring,  or  meritorious 
cause  of  remission.  On  this  subject,  so  far  as 
we  know,  his  views  are  Scriptural.  And  though 
we  do  not  think  with  the  Indian,  that  two  truths 
would  palliate  one  falsehood,  yet  amid  such  a 
mass  of  error,  we  rejoice  to  find  one  truth  to 
commend.  The  following  quotation  will  show 
his  sentiments  in  his  own  words  :  "  Immersion, 
nor  faith,  procures  remission.  The  blood  of  Je- 
sus, through  the  favor  of  God,  procures,  faith  ap-  • 
prebends,  and  baptism  takes  hold  of  the  boon 
of  Heaven,  or  is  the  means  of  our  enjoyment." 
With  this  explanation  we  resume  the  subject. 
Now,  had  Mr.  Campbell  been  as  wise  as  his 
followers  consider  him  great,  and  as  well  ac- 
quainted with  the  scietice  of  salvation,  as  he 
professes  to  be  with  classic  lore,  and  with  the 
wisdom  of  theological  schools,  immersion  as 
the  tneans  of  justification,  would  have  formed 
no  part  of  his  creed.  This  we  say  with  con- 
fidence, and  appeal  to  the  judgment  of  the  in- 
telligent, candid,  and  unprejudiced  reader,  who 
may  have  perused  what  was  written,  in  con- 
firmation of  what  we  say.  He  will  at  once 
respond,  that  the  Scriptures,  there  examined, 
do  not  sustain  the  doctrine.  And  as  these  texts, 
which  are  mainly  relied  upon  to  prove  the  doc- 
trine in  question,  do  not  prove  it,  consequently, 
that  doctrine  falls  to  the  ground,  and  presents  our 
reformer  to  the  world  as  another  monument  of  the 
folly  of  the  attempt  to  improve  the  Word  of  God. 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED,  87 

That  the  literal  reading  of  a  few  passages  of 
Scripture,  seems  to  favor  the  doctrine  we  op- 
pose, has  been  conceded.  But  what  of  this  ? 
Shall  we  adopt  the  Campbellite's  mode  of  con- 
struing Scripture,  that  "z7  means,  literally, 
what  it  says,''''  and  hence,  conclude  the  doctrine 
true  ?  To  do  this,  would  drive  us  to  surrender 
the  leading  doctrine  of  Christianity,  and  to  ad- 
mit that  the  Bible  teaches  the  most  absolute 
nonsense.  Our  Lord,  when  handing  to  his  dis- 
ciples the  bread  used  at  the  "Last  Supper," 
said,  "  Take,  eat ;  this  is  my  body."  This,  ac- 
cording to  the  mle  adopted,  literally  means 
what  it  literally  says.  Then  the  bread  was 
literally  transubstantiated  into  the  real  body  of 
the  Savior,  and  eaten  by  his  disciples.  And  as 
he  had  but  one  body,  Judas  must  have  betrayed 
a  phantom,  and  Pilate  crucified  an  imaginary 
something,  we  cannot  tell  what,  but  certainly 
not  our  Lord  himself,  not  his  body,  for  that  had 
been  eaten  by  the  eleven  disciples  a  few  hours 
before.  Thus  we  are  driven  to  the  conclusion, 
that  Christ  was  not  crucified ;  and  hence,  to 
hope  for  "redemption  through  his  blood,"  is 
of  all  hopes  the  most  forlorn  and  hopeless. 
Again,  the  Savior  said,  "  Let  the  dead  bury 
their  dead  ;  and  this,  too,  must  mean  what  it 
says.  A  neighbor  dies  ;  we  would  be  glad  to 
manifest  our  respect  for  him,  by  assisting  at  his 
intennent;  but  this  the  Book  has  forbidden, 
and,  consequently,  his  burial  is  consigned  to 
those  that  had  previously  died.  These  are  only 
a  few  of  the  dangers  and  absurdities,  involved 
D 


38  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  | 

in  the  application  of  this  rule  of   interpreta- 
tion. 

,,   Perhaps  Mr.  Campbell  may  demur  to  this, 
and  deny  that  he  ever  intended  to  convey  the 
idea  that  the  Word  of  God  is  always  to  be  un- 
derstood, as  literally  meaning  ivhat  it  literally 
says.     But  that  he  originally  gave  it  currency, 
and  that  his  follov^^ers  received  it  as  an  axiom," 
and  proclaimed  it  as  the  only  safe  rule  for  the 
interpretation    of   Scripture,    might   be    easily 
proved.     It  is  true,  after  having  witnessed  the 
farcical  attitude  in  which  the  position,  as  car- 
ried out  by  his  followers,  was  placing  him,  he 
attempted  a  partial  retreat ;  and  hence,  when 
hard  pressed,  his  followers  have  learned  to  say, 
that  they  only  mean  that  the  Scripture  means 
what  its  meaning  says  ;  i.  e.  in  plain  English, 
it  7neans  what  it  does  mean — a  position  which 
no  man  in  his  senses  will  question ;  but  in  the 
nomenclature  of  this  neiv  gospel  we  must  give 
it  the  following  interpretation :   The  Scripture 
means  what  it  says  tvhen  it  seems  to  favor 
Campbellism,  but  when  its  sayings  do  7iot  ac- 
cord loitli  this  system,  it  7n€ans  what  it  does 
not  say.     And  thus,  when  preaching  baptism 
"for  the  remission  of  sins,"  they  continue  to 
plead  for  the  literal  application  of  the  principle 
originally    assumed — "  the    Scripture    means 
what  it  says.^^     Nor  is  this  pertinacious  ad- 
herence at  all  surprising,  for,  to  surrender  this 
principle  would  lead  to  the  abandonment  of 
their  favorite  notions ;   or,  at  least,   it  would 
leave  the  leading  feature  of  their  system  with 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  39 

about  as  much  evidence  and  probability  for  its 
support,  as  have  the  marvelous  adventures  of 
Baron  Munchauson. 

We  notice,  in  another  point  of  light,  the  fol- 
ly, and,  also,  the  danger  of  the  doctrine  before 
us.     Upon  the  literal  reading  of  some  three  or 
four  isolated  texts,  and  upon  an  arbitrary  con- 
struction, and  by  an  unnatural  application  of  a 
few  passages  of  Scripture,  Mr.  Campbell  has 
founded  a  scheme   for  obtaining  remission  of 
sins,  which  is  directly  opposed  by  more   than 
one  hundred  texts   and  circumstances  recorded 
in  the  Bible.     This,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  is  a 
dangerous  precedent,  and  calculated  to  counte- 
nance almost  every  absurdity  that  assumes  the 
garb  of  Christianity.     What  visionary  sectary 
might  not  on  this  ground,  attempt  to  reform  the 
church,  and  introduce  his  7iotio?is  as  the  "  an- 
cient gospel?"     Such  efforts  have  often  been 
made.     Look  at  the  Socinian,  the  Sliciker,  the 
Universalist,  the   Mormonite,  and  the  crazy 
Live-for-ever  !     Each  of  these  has  found  a  few 
phrases,  or  sentences  of  Scripture,  that  seem 
to  favor  his  notions  ;   and   setting  them  up  as 
the  only   standard  of  faith   and   practice,  has 
made  proselytes.     Nay,  more,  the  attempt  to 
raise  a  sect,  whose  members  should   e«f,  and 
drinks  and  talk,  and   laugh,  and  scream,  and 
cry  like  little  children,  met  with  some  encour- 
agement ;  and  could  plead  in  its  behalf,  the  let- 
ter  of  Scripture,  in   the  words   of  the  Savior, 
with  as  much  plausibility  as  this  plea  can  be 
urged  for  water  regeneration. 


40  CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED. 

On  the  same  ground,  we  could  easily  multi- 
ply theories,  and  form  systems,  repugnant,  alike, 
to  the  tenor  of  Scripture,  and  the  opinions  of 
Mr.  Campbell.     If  half  a  dozen  detached  por- 
tions of  the  New  Testament,  justify  his  theory 
of  baptism  as  the  condition  of  remission  of 
sins,  the   same   amount  of  testimony  ^vill  au- 
thorize  any  other   theory.     And,   hence,  we 
might  exclude  repentance,  baptism,  and  faith 
from  the  office  of  obtaining  remission,  because 
a  few  texts  promise   this  blessing  consequent 
upon  prayer.     Take  the  following :  ^^Jlsk  and 
ye  shall   receive ;"  "  How  much  more  shall 
your  Heavenly  Father  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
them  that  ask  him  ;"  "  Whosoever  shall  call 
on   the  name  of  the  Lord,  shall  be  saved." 
Again,  the  Publican    prayed,  and  went  down 
from  the   temple  ju^ified ;    the  thief  upon  the 
cross   prayed,   was   forgiven,    and   taken    the 
same  day  to  paradise ;   and  Peter  said  to  one 
whom  he  pronounced  "  in  the  gall  of  bitterness, 
and  in  the  bond  of  iniquity,"  ^' pray   God,  if 
perhaps  the  thought  of  thine  heart  may  be  for- 
given thee."     These  precepts  and  circumstanc- 
es, do  certainly  give  as   much  countenance  to 
that    theory  which    should   make  prayer  the 
means  of  justification,  as  can  be  produced  in 
favor  of  the  ivater  scheme. 

Another  plausible  system  might  be  predicated 
upon  confession.  It  is  said,  "If  we  confess 
our  sins,  he  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive  us 
our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteous- 
ness."— 1  John,  i.  9.    The  apostle  here  prom- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  41 

ises  both  pardon  and  sanctification,  upon  the 
condition,  that  we  "  confess  our  sins;"  and  this 
is  more  than  is  anywhere  said  of  baptism. 
With  what  seeming  plausibility  might  some  de- 
signing sophist  seize  upon  this  passage,  and  tell 
the  people,  that  "  the  clergy  of  all  denomina- 
tions, are  blind  leaders  of  the  blind  ;  and  that 
they  are  still  in  the  fogs  of  mystic  Babylon, 
'unjustified,  unadopted,  and  lost  to  all  christian 
life  and  enjoyment;'  that  neither  prayer,  nor 
songs,  nor  repentance,  nor  faith,  nor  baptism, 
is  necessary ;  that  God  only  requires  the  sin- 
ner to  confess  his  sins  ;  and  having  done  this, 
he  knows  his  sins  are  pardoned,  because  he 
knows  the  Word  of  God  cannot  fail."  That 
this  scheme  would  take  with  some,  and  that 
these  assertions  would  gain  converts,  must  be 
obvious  to  those  who  have  marked  the  success 
of  Campbellism,  founded  on  similar  principles, 
and  sustained  by  similar  arguments. 

But  though  the  doctrine  in  question,  as  well 
as  the  theories  we  have  supposed,  seems  to  be 
countenanced  by  a  few  texts  of  Scripture,  the 
Word  of  God  is  not  inconsistent,  the  Bible  does 
not  contradict  itself.  In  the  plan  of  salvation, 
man's  duties  and  his  enjoyments  are  insepara- 
bly connected.  Various  duties,  and  '•  good 
works,"  are  required  of  him ;  which  in  their 
performance,  become  means  of  grace ;  and 
hence,  God's  blessing,  and  the  promise  of  par- 
don, are  in  some  sense  connected  with  prayer, 
confession,  baptism,  and  all  other  acts  of  obe- 
dience.    But   still,   the    Scriptures   uniformly 

L-2 


42  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

teach,  that  remission  of  sins,  in  the  sense  of 
accounting  a  sinner  righteous  before  God,  is 
not  to  be  obtained  by  "works  of  righteousness," 
or  by  any  thing  elss  that  he  hcifs  done,  or  can 
do,  as  ivorks^  but  thai  the  grace  of  God  is  man- 
ifested in  presenting  this  blessing,  solely  upon 
the  condition  of /«///?.  "  It  is  ol  faith,  that  it 
might  be  by  grace." 

We  believe  that  the  condition  of  justification, 
on  the  part  of  the  sinner,  is  faith  alone  ^  be- 
cause Jesus  Christ  and  his  apostles  uniformly 
taught  this  doctrine;  and  neither  the  Campbell- 
ite  sneer,  of  '-faith-alonc-men,'"  nor  the  charge 
of  ^^  inconsistency,^^  from  the  same  source, 
shall  deter  us  from  giving  heed  to  their  instruc- 
tions. In  a  late  number  of  the  Millennial  Har- 
binger, those  who  preach  with  St.  Paul,  "  that 
a  man  is  justified  by  faith,  without  the  deeds 
of  the  law,"  are  charged  by  Mr.  Campbell,  and 
one  of  his  pets,  with  contradicting  themselves, 
and  not  believing  what  they  preach.  And 
why  ?  Because  they  believe  that  repentance 
must  accompany  y«i7 A.  But  is  there  any  in- 
consistency in  this  ?  If  so,  wdiat  an  inconsis- 
tent man  is  Mr.  Alexander  Campbell,  who  has 
published  to  the  world  that  "immersion  alone 
is  the  act  of  turning  to  God  ;"  and  yet  declares 
ihai faith  and  reforrnation  must  precede  that 
act.  Verily,  "  those  that  live  in  glass  houses 
should  not  throw  stones." 

When  the  Philippian  jailor  inquired,  "What 
must  I  do  to  be  saved  ?"  the  apostle  answered, 
'*  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  43 

shall  be  saved,  and  thy  house."  When  Peter 
preached  to  Cornelius,  and  them  that  were  with 
him,  he  declared,  that  to  Jesus  Christ  "  gave 
all  the  prophets  witness,  that  through  his  name 
whosoever  beUeveth  in  him  shall  receive  re- 
mission of  sins  ;"  and  afterwards,  when  speak- 
ing of  this  visit  to  the  Gentiles,  and  pleading 
their  cause  before  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  he 
said,  that  God  had  received  them  upon  the 
same  condition  he  had  received  the  Jews,  "pu- 
rifying their  hearts  by  faith. ^''  In  these  texts, 
salvation,  remission  cf  sins,  and  purification 
of  heart,  are  offered  upon  the  cgndition  of  b.e- 
lief  and  declared  to  be  "  hy  faith,''''  and  they, 
if  the  Scriptures  said  nothing  more  on  the  sub- 
ject, would  serve  as  a  set-off  against  the  plan 
of  Mr.  Campbell,  and  afford  some  countenance 
to  the  opinion,  that  "  faith  alone"  is  the  condition 
of  salvation  from  sin.  But  the  terms  of  pardon 
are  too  important  to  guilty  man,  to  be  involved 
in  any  uncertainty;  and  hence,  they  are  so  clear- 
ly stated,  and  so  frequently  repeated  in  the 
New  Testament,  as  to  exclude  all  possibility 
of  doubt.  Pardon  of  sin,  is  therein  positively 
declared  to  be  ''by  faith,"  "through  faith," 
and  "  of  faith  ;"  and  salvation  from  sin,  in  its 
various  acceptations,  is,  in  more  than  three 
hundred  passages,  represented  as  depending 
upon  the  condition  of  faith,  without  any  allu- 
sion to  baptism,  or  to  any  other  act  of  obedi- 
ence. From  which  it  is  clear,  ihdX faith,  and 
not  works  of  any  kind  or  qualit}^  is  taught  by 
our  Lord  and  his  apostles,  as  the  condition  of 


44  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

justification,  or  remission  of  sins ;  and  hence, 
the  scheme  which  makes  baptism  that  condi- 
tion, or  any  part  of  it,  did  not  originate  from 
the  Bible. 

God's  plan  of  justifying  the  ungodly,  as  re- 
vealed in  his  Word,  we  believe  to  be  through 
faith  alone,  and  feel  confident  of  our  ability  to 
prove  this  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  intelligent, 
unprejudiced  reader;  but  before  we  proceed 
further,  it  may  be  proper  to  notice  an  attempted 
evasion.  It  is  said  that  baptism  cannot  inval- 
idate faith  ^  and,  therefore,  that  the  additioii 
of  baptism  to  faith  as  a  iirerequisite  for  for- 
giveness, can  do  no  harm,  though  that  prere- 
quisite were  faith  alone.  The  fact  that  Mr. 
Campbell  has  given  this  position  currency, 
through  the  "  Millennial  Harbinger,"  seems  to 
render  some  notice  of  it  necessary,  though  its 
absurdity  must  be  obvious  to  the  reader.  That 
the  reward  may  be  "reckoned  of  grace,"  and 
not  "  of  debt,"  God  has  promised  remission  of 
sins  "  to  him  that  worketh  not,  but  belicteth;''^ 
but  man,  considering  the  arrangement  of  Jeho- 
vah defective,  attempts  to  improve  the  plan  by 
adding  vwrks  to  faith,  and  tells  the  world,  that 
*'it  is  not  faith,  but  going  doivn  into  the  wa- 
ter, that  obtains  remission  of  sins  ;"  and  then 
consoles  himself  by  the  reflection,  that  if  the 
condition  should  prove  to  be  faith  alone,  the 
addition  of  baptism  must  be  harmless,  inasmuch 
^s  faith  is  retained  as  a  part  of  the  condition. 
Bui,  the  most  ordinary  reader  will  see  the  dan- 
ger of  making  that  depart  only,  which  God  had 


CAMPEELLISM    EXPOSED.  45 

made  the  whole;  and,  also,  that  the  uniting  of 
works  with  faith  as  the  condition  of  pardon,  en- 
tirely changes  the  ground  of  the  sinner's  ac- 
ceptance with  God.  St.  Paul  argued  that  the 
pardon  of  sin  upon  the  condition  of  faith  alone, 
tended  to  magnify  the  grace  of  God,  and  to  ex- 
clude boasting  from  the  creature  ;  but  if  bap- 
tism is  that  which  obtains  the  blessing,  it  is  no 
longer  of  grace,  but  of  debt,  and  the  creature 
has  whereof  to  boast,  and  may  say,  "  Come 
hither  all  ye  that  fear  the  Lord,  and  I  will  tell 
you  what  I  have  done  for  my  soul.  I  have  been 
down  into  the  water — I  have  washed  away  my 
sins — I  am  happy,  because  I  have  done  all 
this."  It  is  thus  seen,  that  Mr.  Campbell's 
scheme  neutralizes  the  grace  of  God  in  the  par- 
don of  sin,  if  it  does  not  entirely  exclude  it, 
and  offers  remission  upon  principles  contra- 
ry to  the  teachings  of  the  New  Testament. 
But  further,  this  scheme,  while  it  talks  much 
about  faith,  comes  short  of  the  faith  required  in 
the  gospel.  And  as  this  is  a  source  of  error, 
and  of  manifest  danger  to  those  who  embrace 
the  system,  before  we  proceed  to  prove  that 
--justification  is  by  faith,  we  shall  endeavor  to 
ascertain  the  nature  of  that  faith,  which  the 
Scriptures  connect  with  justification. 

Mr.  Campbell,  we  believe,  admits  of  no  high- 
er degree  of  faith,  than  the  assent  of  the  mind, 
produced  by  the  force  of  evidence.  The  ground 
assumed  by  his  followers,  is,  "  that  man  is  not 
so  depraved  as  to  require  any  divine  agency  to 
induce,  or  to  enable  him  to  believe  the  gospel ; 


46  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

th3X  faith  and  belief,  strictly  speaking,  mean 
the  same  thing,  and  are  entirely  predicated  upon 
evidence  ;  and  that  tlie  faith  required  in  order 
to  salvation  is  only  a  full  persuasion  of  the 
truth  of  the  gospel  facts,"  From  whicji  it  is 
clear,  that  a  Campbellite's  faith  is  only  historic, 
and  nothing  more  than  the  assent  of  the  mind 
to  the  truth  of  any  fact,  sustained  by  credible 
testimony.  This  view  of  faith  is  what  we  had 
allusion  to  in  a  former  number,  when  we  said, 
that  Mr.  Campbell  rejects  that  faith  which  the 
Scriptures  require.  And  we  are  still  of  the 
same  opinion  ;  for  though  the  Scriptures  do  re- 
quire a  belief  of  the  facts  therein  contained, 
this  is  not  all  they  require,  nor  is  this  all  that 
faith  in  its  fullest  sense  implies. 

Faith  is  presented  in  Scripture  under  two 
leading  views.  The  first  embraces  the  assent 
of  the  mind;  the  second,  the  confidence,  reli- 
ance, and  trust,  of  the  will  and  the  affections. 
The  former  may  exist  without  the  latter  (and 
here  is  where  Campbellites  make  shipwreck  of 
their  faith,)  but  the  latter  cannot  exist  without 
the  former.  That  all  faith  is  not  the  same,  is 
clearly  taught  in  the  Scriptures.  The  Savior 
commends  the  greatness  of  the  faith  of  some, 
while  he  condemns  the  "  little  faith"  of  others. 
A  dead,  inoperative  faith  is  mentioned  by  St. 
James  ;  and  faith  in  the  sense  of  intellectual  as- 
sent to  truth,  is  allovv'edtobe  possessed  even  by 
devils.  But  neither  this  "  little  faith,"  nor  this 
'*dead  faith,"  can  be  what  the  Scriptures  require 
in  order  to  salvation ;  for  those  who  possess  it  are 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  1  I 

condemned.  It  is,  therefore,  certain,  that  the 
faith  of  the  christian  includes  more  than  a  be- 
lief of  the  general  truths  of  revelation.  It 
combines  with  the  belief  of  those  truths,  a  C07i- 
Jidence  in,  and  a  reliance  upon  the  merits  of 
Christ  alone.  In  other  words,  it  unites  assent 
with  reliance,  belief  with  trust.  Of  Christ  it 
was  said,  "  in  his  name  shall  the  Gentiles 
trust. ^''  He  is  proclaimed  as  the  only  true 
sacrifice  for  sin,  and  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  are 
required  to  renounce  their  own  righteousness, 
and  confide  solely  in  his  death  and  mediation. 
He  is  set  forth  as  a  propitiation,  "  through  faith 
in  his  blood  ;"  which  faith  can  neither  mean 
mere  assent  to  the  historical  fact  that  his  blood 
was  shed  upon  Calvary  ;  nor  a  mere  belief  of 
the  doctrine  that  his  blood  has  an  atoning  vir- 
tue ;  but  as  he  has  made  "a  sin  oflering  for 
us,"  "  faith  in  his  blood,"  implies  a  confident 
reliance  on  him  for  pardon.  A  further  illustra- 
tion of  this  view  of  faith  is  seen  in  the  address 
of  our  Lord  to  his  disciples  upon  the  withering 
away  of  the  fig  tree.  "  Have  faith  in  God  ; 
for  verily  I  say  unto  you,  that  M^hosoever  shall 
say  unto  this  mountain.  Be  thou  removed,  and 
be  thou  cast  into  the  sea,  and  shall  not  doubt 
in  his  hearty  but  shall  believe  [trust]  that  these 
things  which  he  saith  shall  come  to  pass,  he 
shall  have  whatsoever  he  saith."  Now,  when 
he  exhorted  his  disciples  to  "  have  faith  in 
God,"  he  certainly  did  not  mean  to  question 
their  belief  of  the  existence  of  God.  Thus 
faith  in  this  sense  was  not  doubted.     But  he 


48  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

exhorted  them  to  exercise  a  higher  degree  of 
faith,  i.  e.,  a  confidence,  or  trust  in  the  prom- 
ises of  God,  when  called  by  him  to  contend 
with  mountainous  difficulties.  Under  the  idea 
of  confidence^  St.  Paul,  also,  refers  to  faith, 
when  he  says,  Heh.  x.  35  :  "  Cast  not  away, 
therefore,  your  confidence,  which  hath  great 
recompense  of  reward;"  for  he  adds  in  the 
38th  verse,  "  Now  the  just  shall  live  hy  faith; 
but  if  any  man  draw  back,  my  soul  shall  have 
no  pleasure  in  him."  Here  it  is  obvious,  that 
the  apostle  contrasts,  living  by  faith,  with 
drawing  back  and  casting  confidence  away ; 
and  hence,  confidence  and  faith,  are  used  as 
synonymous  terms. 

It  is  thus  clearly  seen,  that  that  faith  which 
the  Scriptures  make  the  condition  of  justifica- 
tion, combines  with  the  belief  of  truth,  a  trust 
in,  a  reliance  upon,  and  a  confident  taking  hold 
of  the  merits  of  Christ's  death  as  a  sacrifice  for 
our  sins.  Did  faith  in  the  former  sense,  neces- 
sarily include  the  latter,  the  Campbellite  notion 
concerning  faith,  would  be  harmless.  But  this 
it  does  not.  The  former  may  exist,  without 
one  particle  of  the  latter.  Twenty-five  years 
ago,  I  believed  that  there  was  such  a  man  as 
Napoleon  Bonaparte,  whose  arms  seemed  in- 
vincible, and  who  bid  fair  to  overturn  the  dy- 
nasties of  Europe;  but  I  did  not  admire  his 
character,  had  no  confidence  in  his  pretensions, 
^nd  never  desired  to  trust  him  for  any  thing. 
This  may  illustrate  the  point  before  us  :  Wick- 
ed men  read  the  Bible,  and  hear  it  expounded, 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  49 

till  they  become  convinced  of  its  truth,  give  the 
full  assent  of  their  minds  to  the  facts  it  devel- 
ops, and  have  all  the  faith  that  a  Campbellite 
requires  ;  but  their  hearts  being  at  enmity  with 
God,  they  do  not  confide  or  trust  in  the  gift  of 
his  Son,  for  salvation  ;  and  hence,  they  remain 
unrenewed  in  their  spirit  and  conduct. 

The  most  unlettered  christian  will  see  the 
difference  between  the  faith  of  assent,  and  that 
of  reliance,  or  trust,  and  that  true  and  saving 
faith  must  include  both.  Indeed,  to  confide  or 
trust  in  Christ,  constitutes  the  principal  essence 
of  faith,  and  is  the  condition  of  justification. 
"  But,"  to  use  the  words  of  Watson,  "  this  is 
not  a  blind  and  superstitious  trust  in  the  sacri- 
fice of  Christ,  like  that  of  the  heathen  in  their 
sacrifices  ;  nor  the  presumptuous  trust  of  wick- 
ed and  impenitent  men,  who  depend  on  Christ 
to  save  them  in  their  sins  ;  but  such  a  trust  as 
is  exercised  according  to  the  authority  and  di- 
rection of  the  Word  of  God ;  so  that  to  know 
the  gospel  in  its  leading  principles,  and  to  have 
a  cordial  belief  in  it,  is  necessary  to  that  more 
specific  act  of  faith  which  is  called  reliance^ 
or  in  systematic  language,  fiducial  assent.''^ 
"  With  the  heart  man  believeth  unto  righteous- 
ness." 

Having  defined  and  illustrated  the  nature  of 
that  faith,  which  the  Scriptures  connect  with 
salvation,  and  found  it  to  combine  reliance  and 
trust,  with  assent,  we  proceed  to  show  that  this 
is  that  qualifying  condition  to  which  the  prom- 
ise of  God  annexes  justification. 
3  E 


50  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  to  prove,  that  justi- 
fication, pardon  and  remission  of  sins,  forgive- 
ness oi'  sins,  the  non-imputation  of  sin,  and  the 
imputation  of  righteousness,  are  different  New 
Testament  terms  and  plirases  of  tlie  same  im- 
port. Believing  that  our  opponents  will  con- 
cede this,  we  shall  only  adduce  one  quotation. 
St.  Paul  clearly  uses  justification  and  forgive- 
ness as  synonymous  terms,  when  he  says,  "  Be 
it  known  unto  you,  therefore,  men  and  brethren, 
that  through  this  Man  is  preached  unto  you  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  :  and  by  tiini  all  that  be- 
lieve are  justified  from  all  things,  from  which 
ye  could  not  be  justified  by  the  law  of  Moses." 
— Acts,  xiii.  38,  39.  In  this  passage,  to  be 
forgiven,  and  to  be  justified,  are  represented  as 
the  same  state,  and  as  implying  the  same  act 
of  divine  mercy  by  which  sin  is  remitted,  and- 
the  sinner  accounted  righteous  before  God. 
Keeping  this  in  mind,  the  reader  will  be  pre- 
pared to  attend  us,  while  we  demonstrate  that 
faith,  and  not  baptism,  is  the  condition  upon 
which  the  Scriptures  offer  the  pardon  of  sin. 

That  justification  by  faith  alone  was  the 
grand  doctrine  of  the  Reformation,  brought 
forth  from  the  Scriptures  by  Luther,  Melanc- 
thon,  and  others,  and  by  them  successfully 
urged  against  the  corruptions  of  the  church  of 
Rome,  will  not  be  questioned.  And  that  this 
doctrine  has  been  a  leading  feature  in  the  creeds 
of  most  of  the  reformed  churches,  Arminian 
as  well  as  Calvinistic,  from  that  time  to  the  pres- 
ent, is  also  undeniable.     It  is  not  pretended  i| 


C\MPEELL1SM    EXPOSED.  51 

that  these  facts  prove  the  truth  of  this  doctrine, 
but  they  certainly  liave  an  important  bearing, 
and  are  entitled  to  some  deference.  That  chris- 
tians of  different  parties  and  opinions,  under  the 
influence  of  conflicting  interests,  and,  too  fre- 
quently, dividedby  sectarian  prejudices,  should, 
for  several  hundred  years,  unite  in  receiving 
and  defending  justification  by  faith  alone,  is 
strong  presumptive  evidence  of  its  truth.  We 
cannot  easily  account  for  the  unanimity  of  sen- 
timent upon  this  point,  among  Protestant  chris- 
tian,s  but  upon  the  ground  that  the  doctrine  is 
taught  in  the  Scriptures.  And  certainly  the  at- 
tempt to  condemn  the  Protestant  christian  world, 
and  to  overturn  the  principles  of  the  Reforma- 
tion from  Popery,  by  the  introduction  of  works, 
as  the  condition  of  justification,  comes  in  "  a 
questionable  shape,"  from  a  Protestant  Refor- 
mer. 

But  we  neither  rely  upon  the  above  facts,  nor 
upon  any  other  human  authority  to  prove  the 
point  in  issue.  The  Word  of  God  is  our  only 
dependence.  To  the  Scriptures  we  turn  ;  and 
if  justification  by  faith,  without  works,  be  not 
therein  taught  and  defended,  we  shall  abandon 
it,  and  take  shelter  with  the  Campbellites,  or 
the  Catholics.  But  if  there  be  any  thing  clear- 
ly taught  by  our  Lord  and  his  aposdes,  it  is  the 
■doctrine  for  which  we  contend.  In  the  above 
quotation  from  Acts  xiii.  St.  Paul  declares  "all 
that  believe  are  justified."  This  language  is 
pointed  and  clear,  and  as  obviously  opposed  to 
the  doctrine  of  Mr.  Campbell,  as  day  to  night. 


52  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

According  to  his  teachings,  men  must  believe 
before  they  are  baptized,  but  their  belief  does 
not  justify,  nor  can  they  be  pardoned  until  they 
go  down  into  the  water ;  but  the  apostle  teaches 
a  different  doctrine,  and  without  any  allusion  to 
baptism,  plainly  declares,  that  "  all  that  believe 
are  justified." 

The  Saviour  in  person,  on  various  occasions, 
inculcated  this  important  truth.    In  his  conver- 
sation with  Nicodemus  he  uses  the  following 
language :  "  As  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in 
the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  man 
be  lifted  up  ;  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him 
should   not    perish,    but    have    eternal    life." 
Though  pardon  of  sin  is  not  here  mentioned, 
it  is  evidently  implied;   for  "  eternal  life"  can 
only  be  enjoyed  by  them  whose  sins  are  for- 
given.    But  eternal  life  is  promised  in  this  text 
to  those  that  believe;   therefore,  the  Saviour 
clearly  teaches  remission  and  salvation,  upon 
the  condition  of  faith  alone.     That  this  is  the 
doctrine  of  the   text,  will  be   obvious  to  those 
who  consider  the  circumstance  adverted  to  by 
way  of  illustration.    When  the  Israelitish  camp 
in   the  wilderness  was   infested  by  poisonous 
serpents,  Moses  lifted  up  the  brazen  serpent, 
as  an  antidote  to  the  poison.     But  they  that 
were  bitten,  were  not  required  to  touch   the 
brazen  serpent,  nor  to  look  upon  it,  and  then  to 
plunge  themselves  in  the  water,  as  the  condition 
ojf  their  restoration.     They  were  only  required 
to  look.     And  although  the  poison  was  rapidly 
approaching  the  citadel  of  life,  and  its  victim 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  53 

was  at  the  point  of  death,  so  soon  as  he  opened 
his  eyes  and  looked  upon  the  brazen  serpent  he 
was  healed.  Now  this  look  by  the  natural 
eye,  upon  the  serpent  that  Moses  lifted  up,  for- 
cibly illustrates  that  look  by  the  eye  of  faith, 
upon  a  crucified  Savior,  which  is  required  of 
the  sinner.  And  as  in  the  former  case,  life 
was  promised,  solely,  upon  the  condition  that 
they  should  look  upon  the  serpent  of  brass,  so, 
also,  in  the  latter,  remission  of  sins  and  eternal 
life,  are  offered  upon  the  condition  of  faith 
alone. 

That  this  is  the  doctrine  taught  by  the  ex- 
press letter  of  Scripture,  no  one  can  deny  ;  and 
so  numerous  are  the  passages  that  bear  upon 
this  point,  that  to  give  them  to  the  reader, 
would  subject  us  to  the  necessity  of  transcrib- 
ing a  considerable  part  of  the  New  Testament. 
Take  the  following:  "  Abraham  6c/zeue{/  God 
and  it  was  counted  unto  him  for  righteousness." 
^-Roni.  iv.  3.  "To  him  that  worketh  not, 
but  believeth  on  him  that  justifieth  the  ungod- 
ly, his  faith  is  counted  for  righteousness" — 
verse  5.  '*  We  say  that  faith  was  reckoned  to 
him  for  righteousness" — verse  9.  "  Now  it 
was  not  written  for  his  sake  alone,  that  it  was 
imputed  to  him  ;  but  for  us  to  whom  it  shall  be 
imputed,  if  we  believe  in  him  who  raised  up 
Jesus  our  Lord  from  the  dead" — verse  23,  24. 
In  t?iese  quotations,  taken  promiscuously  from 
one  chapter,  faith  is  seven  times  declared  to  be 
the  condition  upon  which  man  receives  re- 
mission of  sins  and  is  accounted  righteous. 
e2 


54  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

In  these  texts  it  should  be  noted,  that  ''faith'' 
is  plainly  said  to  be  "  imputed  for  righteous- 
ness ;"  an  expression  which  is  no  where  used 
of  baptism,  or  of  any  other  kind  of  works ; 
and  in  this  we  see  the  excellency  of  faith,  and 
the  propriety  of  making  it  the  condition  of  par- 
don. 

The  tenor  of  Scripture,  where  justification 
is  the  theme,  accords  with  the  above  passages. 
Faith  is  frequently  said  to  be  accounted  to  the 
sinner  for  righteousness,  and  his  justification 
is  often  declared  to  be  "by  faith,"  "through 
faith,"  and  "  of  faith."  Now  if  baptism  occu- 
pied the  place  of  faith  in  these  expressions,  or 
was  connected  with  it,  there  would  be  no  diffi- 
culty in  making  it  the  condition  of  remission 
of  sins.  But  the  case  is  difi"erent ;  there  is  no 
allusion  to  baptism,  or  to  any  other  work,  ei- 
ther moral,  ceremonial,  or  evangelical ;  and  the 
only  satisfactory  reason  that  can  be  given  for 
the  apostle's  failure  to  connect  baptism  with 
faith  as  the  condition  of  pardon,  is,  that  it  was 
not  designed  to  form  any  part  of  that  condition. 

Justification  by  faith,  is  so  frequently  and 
positively  taught  in  the  unequivocal  language 
of  the  New  Testament,  that  Mr.  Campbell,  and 
his  adherents,  have  found  it  necessary  to  evade 
the  force  of  that  language,  by  departing  from 
what  the  apostles  say,  and  supplying  what  they 
suppose  them  to  mean  ;  and  hence,  we  are  told 
that  "  being  justified  by  faith,"  means,  "  by  an 
act  of  faith,  or  a  believing  immersion  in  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ."     To  say  nothing  of  the 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  55 

inconsistency  of  this  gloss  as  comiiig  from 
those  who  profess  to  bow  to  the  authority  of 
Scripture,  and  to  believe  that  it  means  what  it 
says,  its  entire  lack  of  evidence,  and  its  palpa- 
ble absurdity,  furnish  its  own  refutation. 

That  the  New  Testament  writers,  by  the 
word  "  faith,"  mean  faith,  and  not  works,  is 
obvious  :  1.  From  the  plain  distinction  which 
they  draw  between  them,  when  they  tell  us, 
that  "faith  works  by  love,"  "is  shown  forth 
by  our  works,"  and  exhort  us  "  to  add  to  our 
faith,  virtue ;  to  virtue,  knowledge ;  and,  2. 
Because  it  is  unreasonable  to  suppose  that 
Christ  and  his  apostles  would  use  a  word  which 
had  a  known  and  fixed  import,  and  mean  by 
this  word  a  thing  directly  the  reverse  of  itself, 
which  they  must  have  done  if  they  intended  to 
include  baptism  in  the  term  faith.  When  the 
apostles  preached  justification  by  faith,  we  can- 
not by  any  reasonable  construction,  understand 
them  to  mean  any  thing  more  than  belief  and 
trust ;  and  hence  faith  is  clearly  set  forth  as  the 
sole  condition  of  remission  of  sins. 

But  let  us  examine  this  Campbellite  gloss  a 
little  further.  It  tells  us,  that  the  apostles,  by 
faith,  intend  a  "  believing  immersion,"  an  act 
springing  from  faith.  If  so,  it  will  do  no  vio- 
lence to  the  Scriptures  to  omit  the  word  "  faith," 
and  to  supply  its  place  by  that  which  it  is  said 
to  mean.  Then  let  us  try  a  few  texts.  Our 
Lord  says,  "  O  woman,  great  is  thy  faith"  (great 
is  thy  believing  immersion.)  St.  Paul  says, 
^*  With  the  heart  man  believeth  unto  righteous- 


56  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

ness"  (with  the  heart  man  is  immersed  unto 
righteousness.)  Again,  "  By  grace  are  ye  saved 
through  faith ;  and  that  not  of  yourselves,  it  is 
the  gift  of  God ;  not  of  works,  lest  any  man 
should  boast"  (by  grace  are  ye  saved  through 
a  believing  immersion  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ; 
and  that  not  of  yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God; 
not  of  works,  lest  any  man  should  boast.)  In 
this  last  quoted  text,  the  apostle  tells  us  that 
salvation  is  the  gift  of  God,  through  faith,  and 
that  works,  as  a  condition,  are  excluded,  so  that 
boasting  might  be  excluded  from  the  sinner  ; 
but  Campbell's  interpretation  declares  that  we 
are  saved  by  works,  for  baptism  is  works  in 
the  proper  sense  of  that  word,  and  it  cannot  be 
any  thing  but  works.  Hence,  the  apostle  is 
made  to  say  in  the  same  sentence,  that  we  are 
saved  by  works,  and  that  we  are  not  saved  by 
works.  It  is  thus  shown,  that  man,  to  support 
an  unscriptural  system,  would  make  an  inspired 
apostle  contradict  himself,  and  convert  the  plain 
truths  and  sober  reasonings  of  the  Word  of  God, 
into  absurdity  and  nonsense. 

The  foregoing  remarks  were  offered  to  show 
the  absurdity  of  the  idea  that  faith,  when  con- 
nected with  remission  of  sins  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, includes  baptism,  or  other  works  of 
obedience.  This  point  claims  a  few  additional 
remarks. 

In  every  discourse  of  St.  Paul,  when  treating 
on  the  method  of  justification,  faith  and  works 
so  far  from  being  united,  are  plainly  opposed 
to  each  other.     In  the  3d  and  4th  chapters  of 


OAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  57 

Romans,  he  treats  on  this  subject  professedly, 
states  it  clearly,  reasons  cogently,  and  con- 
cludes emphatically,  "  That  a  man  is  justified 
by  faith,  without  the  deeds  of  the  laAV."  Now 
Campbellites  tell  us  that  "  the  law"  here  means 
the  Jewish  ritual,  and  we  admit  that  the  apos- 
tle does  exclude  this  law  from  the  office  of  jus- 
tifying ;  but  he  certainly,  in  the  above  expres- 
sion,' had  some  other  law  in  view.  He  proceeds 
directly  to  ask  the  following  question  :  '*  Do 
we  make  void  the  law  through  faith  ?  God 
forbid;  yea,  we  establish  the  law."  All  will 
admit  that  the  apostle  does,  "  through  faith," 
*'make  void"  the  ceremonial  law.  But  he  is 
now  speaking  of  a  law  which  he  does  not  make 
void,  of  course  this  cannot  be  the  rites  of  the 
Mosaic  economy.  The  conclusion  is,  there- 
fore, unavoidable,  that  that  law  which  faith  does 
not  make  void,  is  the  law  of  moral  and  evan- 
gelical works ;  and  as  St.  Paul  argues  that  a 
man  is  justified  without  the  deeds  of  this  law, 
it  follows  that  works  do  not  enter  into  the  con- 
dition of  justification. 

Indeed,  the  apostle's  argument  necessarily 
excludes  from  the  office  of  justifying,  works 
of  evangelical  obedience,  as  well  as  works  of 
the  ceremonial  law.  The  scope  of  his  reason- 
ing is  against  works,  not  for  their  kind  or  qual- 
ity, or  the  dispensation  under  which  they  ori- 
ginated, but  on  account  of  their  nature  as  works. 
He  is  laboring  to  extol  the  grace  and  goodness 
of  God,  by  showing  that  the  pardon  of  our  sins 
is  not  obtained  by  our  act«  of  obedience  to  law, 
3* 


58  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

but  that  it  is  of  his  unmerited  favor.     Hence 
he  says,  "Now  to  him  that  worketh,  is  the 
reward  not  reckoned  of  grace,  but  of  debt.  But 
to  him  that  worketh  not,  but  believeth  on  Him 
that  justifieth  the  ungodly,  his  faith  is  counted 
for  righteousness.     Even  as  David  also  descri- 
beth  the  blessedness  of  the    man  unto  whom 
the  Lordimputeth  righteousness  v>dthout  works, 
saying,  blessed  are  they  whose  iniquities  are 
forgiven,  and  whose  sins  are  covered" — Bom. 
iv.  4 — 7.     Now  we  cannot  suppose  the  apos- 
tle here,  by  "  him  that  worketh,"  to  mean  the 
Jew  only,  seeking  justification  by  the  deeds  of 
the  ceremonial  law,  because,  1.  He  speaks  of 
'*  works,"  without  any  restricting  adjunct  or 
inference  ;  and  if  rites  and  ceremonies  under 
the  Jev/ish  economy  are  ivorks,  rites  and  cer- 
emonies under  the  christian  economy  are  also 
works;  and  2.  This  supposition  would  destroy 
his  argument ;  for,  coming  dovv-n  to  the   16th 
verse,  he  says,  "  Therefore  it  is  oi  faith  that 
it  might  be  by  grace.^^  The  argument  amounts 
to  this  :   Pardon  of  sin  is  of  the  grace  of  God 
alone,  but  a  condition  is  required  of  the  sinner  ; 
if  that  condition  were   ivorks   of  obedience  to 
any  law,  the  "  reward  would  be  reckoned  of 
debt,"  for  having  performed  the  work  he  might 
claim  the  reward  as  his  right,  as  having  earned 
it ;  and  hence,  that  the  sinner  might  have  noth- 
ing "  whereof  to  glory"  in  himself,  but  be  con- 
strained to  "  glory  in  the  Lord,"  his  sins   are 
remitted  upon  the  condition  of  faith  "  without 
works." 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  59 

If  this  is  not  a  necessary  inference  from  St. 
Paul's  reasonings,  and  if  he  did  not  mean,  there- 
by, to  reject  baptism  and  all  other  works,  as  the 
means  of  obtaining  pardon,  and  place  our  jus-- 
tification  upon  the  condition  of  faith  alone,  it 
will  be  difficult  to  show  that  he  came  to  any 
conclusion. 

We  now  proceed  to  the  consideration  of  our 
main  argument  in  defence  of  justification  by 
faith.  That  facts  are  stubborn  arguments, 
though  a  trite  saying,  is  unquestionably  true. 
We  give  the  fact  of  Abraham's  justification  in 
proof  of  the  doctrine  for  which  we  contend, 
and  do  not  fear  to  risk  the  issue  upon  his  case 
alone.  It  is  true  we  are  under  no  necessity  to 
do  this  ;  for  independent  of  his  case,  the  doc- 
trine stands  as  conspicuous  in  the  Scriptures, 
as  the  unclouded  sun  in  the  firmament  of  heav- 
en, but  the  manner  of  his  justification  is  so  di- 
rectly in  point,  that  those  who  will  not  be,  there- 
by, convinced  of  the  fallacy  of  trusting  in  bap- 
tism, Avould  scarcely  be  convinced  "  though  one 
rose  from  the  dead"  for  their  benefit. 

In  presenting  the  case  of  Abraham,  we  shall 
prove,  1.  That  his  justification  is  the  pattern  of 
the  justification  of  sinful  men  in  all  ages  ;  and, 
2.  That  he  was  justified  by  faith  alone.  If  we 
succeed  in  establishing  these  points,  our  "  nega- 
tive" will  be  sustained,  and  baptism,  as  the 
means  of  obtaining  remission  of  sins,  will  be 
proved  to  be  an  unscriptural  assumption. 

1.  That  the  mode  in  which  Abraham  was 
justified,  points  out  the  method  which  God  has 


60  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

revealed  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  is  clearly  se't 
forth  in  two  of  St.  Paul's  epistles.  In  that  to 
the  Galatians  we  have  the  following  language  : 
'*'Know  ye  therefore,  that  they  which  are  of 
faith,  the  same  are  the  children  of  Abraham. 
And  the  Scriptures,  foreseeing  that  God  would 
justify  the  heathen  through  faith,  preached  be- 
fore the  gospel  unto  Abraham,  saying.  In  thee 
shall  all  nations  be  blessed.  So  then  they 
which  be  of  faith  are  blessed  with  faithful  Abra- 
ham. And  if  ye  be  Christ's,  then  are  ye  Abra- 
ham's seed,  and  heirs  according  to  promise." 
Here  christians  are  said  to  be  "  blessed  with 
faithful  Abraham,"  and  to  be  his  "  seed"  and 
his  "  children  ;"  from  which  it  is  clear  that  they 
become  "  heirs"  by  walking  in  his  footsteps. 

But  this  point  is  settled  beyond  controversy 
in  the  4th  chapter  of  Romans,  which  the  rea- 
der is  requested  to  examine  for  himself.  It  will 
be  seen  that  the  apostle  in  this  part  of  the  epis- 
tle, is  laboring  to  show  God's  method  of  justi- 
fying the  ungodly  ;  and  for  this  purpose  he  re- 
fers to  the  case  of  Abraham  by  way  of  proof 
and  illustration.  But  this  case  would  be  entire- 
ly irrelevant,  and  prove  nothing,  unless  Abra- 
ham's justification  be  a  pattern  of  the  justifi- 
cation of  his  children.  And  further,  the  apos- 
tle here  says,  that  Abraham  "  received  the  sign 
of  circumcision ;  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of 
the  faith  which  he  had,  yet  being  uncircumcis- 
ed  :  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  all  them  that 
believe — who  also  walked  in  the  steps  of  that 
faith  of  our  father  Mrahamy  Rom.  iv.  11, 


CAMPEELLISM    EXPOSED.  61 

12.  In  this  passage  Abraham  is  declared  to  be 
"  the  father  of  all  that  believe,"  and  they  are 
said  to  ivalk  in  the  steps  of  his  faith.  From 
which  it  follows  that  the  manner  in  which  he 
was  justified,  is^  the  manner  in  which  all  his 
children  are  justified.  If  he  were  justified  by 
faith  and  works,  so  are  they  ;  but  if  the  condi- 
tion of  his  justification  was  "  faith  without 
works,"  then  the  condition  of  their  justification 
is  the  same. 

2.  It  only  remains  for  us  to  ascertain  how 
Abraham  was  justified,  and  then  the  question 
will  be  settled.  On  this,  as  on  all  other  points, 
we  appeal  "  to  the  law  and  testimony,"  to  the 
teachings  of  the  Scriptures,  and  the  recorded 
facts  of  the  case,  which,  in  the  present  instance, 
we  believe  to  be  so  clear  and  decisive  as  to  bid 
defiance,  alike,  to  sophistry  and  scepticism. — 
The  following  Scriptures  are  in  point :  "  If  Abra- 
ham were  justified  by  works,  he  hath  whereof 
to  glory  ;  but  not  before  God.  ¥ox  what  saith 
the  Scriptures  ?  Abraham  believed  God  and  it 
[his  faith]  was  counted  unto  him  for  righteous- 
ness"— Rom.  iv,  2,  3.  "  We  say  that  faith 
was  reckoned  to  Abraham  for  righteousness. 
How  was  it  then  reckoned,  when  he  was  in 
circumcision,  or  in  uncircumcision  ?  Not  in 
circumcision,  but  in  uncircumcision" — (verse 
9,  10).  "Even  as  Abraham  believed  God, 
and  it  was  accounted  to  him  for  righteousness" 
— Gal.  iii,  6.  In  making  these  assertions  St. 
Paul  had  the  authority  of  Moses,  who,  in  giv- 
ing an  account  of  this  transaction,  adds,  *'  and 
F 


62  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

he  believed  in  the  Lord,  and  he  counted  it  to 
him  for  righteousness" — Gen.  xv,  6.  The 
quotations  might  be  muhiplied,  but  these  are 
decisive.  To  add  more  would  seem  like  trifling 
with  the  reader. 

Now,  though  the  Scriptures  cannot  be  always 
understood  according  to   their  literal  reading, 
yet  they   are  generally  to   be  received  in  this 
sense  ;  nor  can  we  with  safety  depart  from  it, 
unless    the   context  presents  the    language   as 
figurative  and  metaphorical,  or  a  different  con- 
struction be  required  in  order  that  the  passage 
may  harmonize  with  the  general  voice,  and  ob- 
vious import  of  Scripture.     But  certainly  there 
is  nothing  in  Abraham's  case  or  in  the  above 
quotations,  to  justify  the  idea  that  the  language 
is  used  figuratively  or  metonymically  ;  nor  does 
the  harmony  of  Scripture  require  that  we  should 
understand  the  term  "faith"  in  these  passages, 
otherwise  than  in  its  proper  and  literal  sense. 
On  the  contrary,  to  understand  it  in  any  other 
sense,  would  imply  a  manifest  contradiction  in 
the  Scriptures,  and  involve  Christianity  in  diffi- 
culties from  which  the  most  subtil  ingenuity 
could  not  extricate  it.     But  these  Scriptures 
declare  explicitly,  that  Abraham's  faith  "  was 
counted,"  "  imputed"  and  "  reckoned  to  him 
for  righteousness,"  and  that  he  was  justified  by 
faith  "  without  works."     It  is   therefore  cer- 
tain, that  faith  was  the   sole  condition  of  his 
pardon. 

This  conclusion  is  confirmed  and  its  correct- 
ness established  by  the  circumstances  connected 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  63 

with  his  justification,  to  which  we  now  appeal. 
Moses  in  the  15th  chapter  of  Genesis,  informs 
us,  that  Abraham  was  justified  when  he  believed 
the  promise  of  God,  that  he  should  have  a  son 
m  his  old  age  ;  St.  Paul  refers  to  the  same  fact, 
and  in  the  following  quotation,   testifies  to  its 
iruth.      Abraham    "  against    hope   believed  in 
iiope,  that  he  might  become  the  father  of  many 
nations  ;   according  to  that  which  was  spoken, 
'  So  shall  thy  seed  be.'     And  being  not  weak 
in  faith,  he  considered  irot  his  own  body  now 
dead,  when  he  was  about  an  hundred  years  old, 
neither  5^et  the  deadness  of  Sarah's  womb  :  he 
staggered  not  at  the  promise   of  God  through 
unbelief;  but  was  strong  in  faith,  giving  glory 
to  God  ;  and  being  fully  persuaded,  that  what 
he  had  promised,  he  was  able  also  to  perform. 
And  therefore  it  was  imputed  to  him  for  right- 
eousness"— 'Bom.  iv.  18-22.     If  then  the  testi- 
mony of  two  inspired  writers  is  to  be  credited, 
it  is  clear,  that  Abraham    was  justified  before 
Isaac  was  born,  and  at  the  time  he  believed  the 
promise  of  God  relative  to  his  birth.     And  this 
circumstance  entirely  excludes  the  notion  that 
any  act  of  obedience   in  the   shape   of  works, 
was  connected  with  his  justification.     No  such 
act  was  required  ;  neither  offering,  nor  ceremo- 
ny, was  at  that  time  demanded.     God  had  pro- 
mised him  a  son  in  his  old  age ;  the  probabili- 
ties of  nature  were  entirely  against  the  fulfill- 
ment of  the  promise,  but  considering  the  abili- 
ty and  fidelity  of  Him  who  had  promised,  he 
believed,  trusted  ^.n^  confided  in  his  word  ;  and 


64  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

by  this  act  of  faith,  which  at  the  time  was  unac- 
companied by  works  of  any  kind  or  quality, 
he  was  justified. 

We  repeat,  that  the  circumstances  of  the  case 
utterly  forbid  the  idea  that  works  of  obedience 
had  any  thing  to  do  with  Abraham's  justification. 
"  It  was  of  faith,  that  it  might  be  by  grace." 
God  demanded  no  works  at  his  hands,  either 
as  a  part  or  the  whole  of  the  condition  of  par- 
don, and,  consequently,  his  performances, 
whatever  they  might  have  been,  could  not  have 
been  acts  of  obedience.  But,  indeed,  he  at- 
tempted nothing  of  the  kind  ;  or  if  he  did,  the 
Scriptures  tell  us  nothing  about  it.  But  if  our 
opponents  still  insist,  that  some  act  of  obedi- 
ence must  have  accompanied  his  faith  or  he 
could  not  have  been  justified,  we  inquire,  what 
was  that  act  ?  Not  baptism,  for  it  at  that  time 
had  no  existence  as  a  religious  ordinance  ;  not 
circumcision,  for  Abraham  was  not  circumcised 
till  several  years  after  his  justification,  nor  was 
it  the  offering  of  Isaac,  for  he  was  not  then 
born.  But  the  inquiry  is  vain,  and  the  search 
fruitless.  The  Scriptures  give  no  information 
of  any  act  of  obedience  in  Abraham's  case, 
when  he  believed  God  concerning  the  promised 
seed,  and  was  justified;  the  circumstances,  as 
recorded,  entirely  exclude  the  idea  of  works, 
and  the  Scriptures  declare  that  he  was  justified 
"  by  faith,  without  works." 

From  all  which  we  consider  our  points  as 
proved,  our  negative  sustained,  and  justification 
by  faith  alone,  unquestionably  established.  And 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  65 

planting  ourself  on  these  facts  and  arguments, 
clad  with  the  panoply  of  gospel  truth,  we  shall 
neither  regard  the  puny  missiles  of  sneers  and 
sarcasms,  nor  fear  the  arguments  of  more  sen- 
sible and  manly  opponents. 

We  have  now  presented  the  substance  of  what 
we  designed  in  proof  of  justification  by  faith. 
Much  more  might  be  adduced,  but  it  is  not 
considered  necessary.  The  case  of  Abraham 
is  decisive.  It  will  scarcely  be  questioned,  that 
his  justification  is  given  by  the  apostle  as  the 
pattern  of  the  justification  of  sinners  in  all 
ages  ;  of  course  our  pardon  is  obtained  on  the 
same  qualifying  principle  that  his  was.  If  this 
is  not  St.  Paul's  meaning,  he  means  nothing, 
and  proves  nothing,  by  his  reference  to  the 
patriarch.  But  the  Scriptures  clearly  teach  that 
*'  faith  without  works,  was  accounted  to  him 
for  righteousness,"  and  the  circumstances  and 
time  of  his  justification  render  it  morally  im- 
possible for  works  of  obedience  to  have  formed 
any  part  of  the  condition  of  his  pardon.  It  is 
therefore  certain,  that  all  who  "  walk  in  the 
steps  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,"  and  become 
his  children,  receive  remission  of  sins  as  he 
did,  by  faith  alone  ;  that  man  is  not,  and  never 
was  in  any  age,  justified  in  the  sense  of  being 
pardoned  and  accounted  righteous,  by  works  of 
any  kind,  whether  moral,  ceremonial,  or  evan- 
gelical ;  and  that  baptism  as  the  means  of  par- 
don, is  man's  invention,  unauthorized  and  un- 
sanctioned by  the  Oracles  of  truth. 

We  proceed  now  to  notice  some  objections 
f2 


66  CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED. 

against  the  doctrine  o^ faith,  as  the  condition  of 
justification.  The  positions  we  have  established 
in  the  case  of  Abraham,  and  the  doctrine  dedu- 
ced therefrom,  are  objected  to, 

I.  Because  St.  James  teils  us,  that  Abraham 
was  "justified  by  works  when  he  ofiered  Isaac 
his  son  upon  the  altar." 

On  this  subject  we  have  v/itnessed  the  dis- 
play of  much  zeal  in  the  pulpit,  and  heard 
many  "  great  swelling  words"  from  the  teachers 
of  Campbellism,  in  laboring  to  reconcile  St. 
Paul's  account  of  Abraham's  justification  to  the 
incidental  remark  of  St.  James.  And  believ- 
ing them  sincere,  we  have  often  lamented  the 
ignorance  they  manifested  on  this  important 
subject.  Taking  it  for  granted,  that  justifica- 
tion is  always  to  be  understood  in  the  same 
sense,  they  conclude  the  two  apostles  to  treat 
of  the  same  thing  ;  but  a  better  knowledge  of 
the  Bible  would  show  them  the  propriety  of 
using  the  term  under  four  different  views,  and 
they  would  at  once  discover  that  these  apos- 
tles do  not  speak  of  justification  in  the  same 
sense.  v.- 

In  meeting  the  above  objection,  we  shall 
avail  ourself,  in  part,  of  the  arguments  of  Mr. 
Watson  in  his  "  Institutes,"  using  our  own 
language,  or  abbreviating  his,  as  may  seem  ex- 
pedient ;  and  unless  we  are  much  too  sanguine, 
it  will  be  made  to  appear,  that  Campbellites, 
on  this  subject,  have  as  greatly  mistaken  St. 
James  as  they  have  mistaken  St.  Paul.  Let  it 
be  remembered,  that  they,  supposing  the  two 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  67 

apostles  to  speak  of  justification  in  the  same 
sense,  and  that  St.  James  tells  the  whole  truth, 
and  St.  Paul  only  a  part,  endeavor  to  reconcile 
.  the  latter  to  the  former. 

We  observe  then,  1.  That  the  attempt  to  in- 
terpret St.  Paul  by  St.  James  involves  a  mani- 
fest absurdity.  The  former  treats  professedlj^ , 
and  in  a  set  discourse,  on  the  subject  in  ques- 
tion, the  justification  of  sinful  man  before  God  ; 
but  the  latter,  if  he  could  be  allowed  to  treat  on 
that  subject  with  the  same  design,  does  it  but 
incidentally.  The  former  enters  into  the  sub- 
ject by  copious  argument,  the  latter  barely 
touches  it,  and  passes  on.  From  which  it  is 
evident,  that  the  whole  truth  must  first  be 
sought  for,  and  can  only  be  expected,  in  the 
writer  who  enters  professedly  and  fully  into 
the  inquiry.  The  absurdity  of  a  contrary 
course,  will  be  obvious  to  every  reader. 

But,  3.  The  two  apostles  do  not  engage  in 
the  same  argument,  because  they  are  not  ad- 
dressing themselves  to  persons  in  the  same  cir- 
cumstances. St.  Paul,  addressing  the  unbe- 
lieving Jews,  who  sought  justification  by 
obedience  to  the  moral  and  ceremonial  law, 
proves,  that  neither  Jew  nor  Gentile  can  be 
justified  by  works  of  obedience  to  any  law,  and 
that  therefore  justification,  in  the  sense  of  par- 
don, must  be  by  faith  alone.  But  St.  James, 
addressing  such  as  professed  Christianity,  but 
had  imbibed  dangerous  views  of  the  nature  of 
faith,  supposing  that  faith,  in  the  sense  of  opin- 
ion or  mere  belief  of  doctrine,  would  save  them, 


68  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

while  they  remained  destitute  of  a  real  change 
of  heart,  and  holiness  of  life,  pleads  for  the  re- 
novation of  man's  nature,  and  evangelical  obe- 
dience, as  the  necessary  fruits  of  real  or  living 
faith.  St.  Paul  proves,  that  works,  in  whole 
or  in  part,  would  not  Jusiify  ;  St.  James  proves, 
that  a  dead  faith,  the  mere  faith  of  assent, 
would  not  save. 

3.  St.  Paul  and  St.  James  do  not  use  the 
term  justification  in  the  same  sense.  It  was 
shown  in  a  former  number,  that  St.  Paul  uses 
it  to  express  the  pardon  of  sin.  But,  that  St. 
James  does  not  speak  of  this  kind  of  justifica- 
tion is  evident  from  his  reference  to  the  case 
of  Abraham,  in  which  we  are  told  that  the  jus- 
tification of  which  he  speaks  took  place  at  the 
time  that  Isaac  was  off'ered  upon  the  altar.  He 
cannot  mean  that  Abraham  was  then  justified 
in  the  sense  of  being  pardoned,  for  St.  Paul, 
on  the  authority  of  Moses,  fixes  that  event 
many  years  previously,  even  before  Isaac  was 
born,  at  the  time  that  he  believed  C4od  relative 
to  the  promised  seed,  and  his  faith  was  impu- 
ted for  righteousness.  It  is  obvious  then,  that 
the  justification  of  Abraham,  mentioned  by  St. 
James,  does  not  mean  the  forgiveness  of  his 
sins,  and  that  he  uses  the  term  in  a  difi'erent 
sense  to  St.  Paul.  And  yet,  Campbellites  will 
understand  them  as  using  the  term  in  the  same 
sense,  and  therefore  assert  that  Abraham  was 
not  forgiven  until  he  had  offered  his  son  upon 
the  altar  ;  by  which,  instead  of  reconciling  the 
two  apostles,  they  plainly  declare  that  the  as- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  69 

sertions  of  Moses  and  St.  Paul  are  not  true. — 
Verily,  this  is  reformation  with  a  vengeance  ! 
4.  The  only  sense  in  which  St.  James  can 
take  the  term  justification,  wlien  he  says  that 
A-braham  was  "justified  by  works,  when  he 
had  offered  Isaac,"  is,  that  his  works  manifest- 
ed or  proved  that  he  was  justified,  proved  that 
he  was  really  justified  by  faith,  or,  in  other 
words,  that  the  faith  by  which  he  was  justified 
was  not  dead  and  inoperative,  but  living  and 
active.  If  this  is  not  his  meaning — if  he  in- 
tends to  say  that  Abraham  was  then  justified 
in  the  sense  of  being  pardoned,  he  direcdy 
contradicts  St.  Paul,  who  places  that  event 
twenty-five  years  before  the  offering  of  Isaac. 
But,  so  far  is  St.  James  from  contradicting  St. 
Paul's  account  of  the  time  and  manner  of  Abra- 
ham's justification,  that  he  clearly  admits  and 
confirms  it,  by  quoting  the  passage  from  Gen- 
esis, in  which  this  is  said  to  have  taken  place 
years  before  ;  and  he  makes  use  of  his  works 
when  he  obeyed  God  in  offering  his  son  upon 
the  altar,  to  prove  that  the  faith,  by  which  he 
was  originally  justified,  was  not  dead^  but  liv- 
ing and  obedient.  "  Seest  thou  how  faith 
wrought  with  his  works,  and  by  works  was 
his  faith  made  perfect,  and  the  Scripture  was 
fidjilled,  v/hich  saith,  '  Abraham  believed  God' 
(in  a  transaction  twenty-five  years  previous), 
'  and  it  was  imputed  to  him  for  righteousness,' 
and  he  was  called  the  friend  of  God" — James 
ii,  22,  23.  Observe  here,  that  St.  James 
quotas  the  same  passage,  Gen.  xv,  6,  which  St. 


70  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

Paul  had  quoted,  and  adds,  **  and  the  Scripture 
was  fulfilled." — The  Scripture  here  said  to  be 
fulfilled,  is  the  above  passage  from  Genesis, 
quoted  by  St.  Paul,  to  prove  that  Abraham 
was  justified,  alone,  by  the  imputation  of  faith 
for  righteousness.  And  this  Scripture,  says 
St.  James,  "  was  fulfilled,"  v/hen  Isaac  was 
ofl'ered  upon  the  altar.  But  how  was  it  fulfill- 
ed ?  Not  in  the  sense  of  being  accomplished, 
for  the  passage  is  neither  typical  nor  prophetic, 
but  the  simple  narrative  of  a  fact  which  trans- 
pired twenty-five  years  before  the  fulfillment 
spoken  of.  The  only  sense  then  in  which  the 
term  "fulfill"  can  be  taken  in  this  passage,  is, 
that  of  illustration  and  establishment. — -When 
Abraham  obeyed  God  by  ofi'ering  his  son  upon 
the  altar,  he  illustrated  and  confirmed  the  truth 
of  the  Scripture  which  declared  him  to  have 
been  justified  by  faith  many  years  prior  to  this 
act  of  obedience,  and  proved  that  the  faith  by 
which  he  was  pardoned  was  living  and  opera- 
tive. It  is  thus  clearly  seen,  that  St.  James 
confirms  St.  Paul's  position,  that  Abraham  was 
pardoned  by  faith  "  without  works,"  and  that 
the  justification  which  he  mentions,  is  not  the 
pardon  of  sin,  but  the  manifes'tation  or  proof 
of  being  in  a  justified  state. 

5.  And  as  St.  James  does  not  use  the  term 
justification  to  express  the  forgiveness  of  sin, 
when  he  speaks  of  the  justification  of  Abraham 
by  works,  it  follows,  that  he  cannot  use  it  in 
this  sense  in  the  general  conclusion  :  "  ye  see, 
then,  how  that  by  works  a  man  is  justified, 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  71 

and  not  by  faith  only."  The  ground  on  which 
he  rests  this  general  inference  is  the  declara- 
tive justification  of  Abraham,  which  resulted 
from  his  act  of  obedience  in  the  case  of  Isaac ; 
the  justification  of  which  he  speaks  in  the  con- 
clusion of  the  argument,  must,  therefore,  be 
taken  in  the  same  sense.  He  is  not  speaking 
of  the  act  of  being  justified,  or  the  means  of 
obtaining  pardon  ;  but  of  being  proved  to  be  in 
a  manifest  and  Scripturally  approved  state  of 
justification.  His  argument  is,  that  "  by  works" 
a  man  is  shown  to  be  in  a  justified  states  that 
his  profession  of  being  in  the  Divine  favor  is 
justified  and  confirmed  by  his  works,  and  not 
only  by  the  faith  of  intellectual  assent  which  is 
dead,  and  unproductive  of  good  works." 

It  is  now  seen,  that  the  two  apostles  perfectly 
agree,  in  teaching  justification,  in  the  sense  of 
pardon  hy  faith  alone;  and  justification,  in  the 
sense  of  proof  and  confirmation,  by  works  of 
obedient  faith.  St.  James  declares  that  no  man 
can  be  saved  by  mere  faith.  But  that  he  does 
not  mean  the  same  kind  and  degree  of  faith, 
to  which  St.  Paul  attributes  a  saving  efficacy, 
his  argument  sufiiciently  proves.  He  speaks 
of  a  faith  which  is  '^  alone"  and  "dead,"  St. 
Paul  of  the  faith  which  is  never  alone,  though 
it  alone  justifieth  ;  the  faith  of  an  humbled  pen- 
itent, who  not  only  yields  speculative  assent  to 
the  gospel  facts,  but  flies  with  confidence  to  the 
atonement  of  Christ,  for  pardon  of  sin  and  de- 
liverance from  it ;  the  faith,  in  short,  which  is 
the  fruit  of  the  Spirit,  and  which  in  after  life, 


72  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

manifests  itself  by  yielding  "the  peaceable  fruits 
of  righteousness." 

There  is  then  no  foundation  for  the  objection; 
the  epistle  of  St.  James  gives  no  countenance 
to  the  propagators  of  the  doctrine  of  remission 
of  sins  through  baptism,  but  confirms  and  es- 
tablishes St.  Paul's  theory  of  "  faith  without 
works  " 

II.  A  second  objection  is,  that  justification 
"without  works,"  is  unfavorable  to  morality, 
and  leads  to  Antinomianism. 

This  objection  is  as  old  as  the  days  of  St. 
Paul.  When  he  preached  forgiveness  of  sins 
"by  grace,"  "through  faith,"  "without 
works,"  the  Pharisaic  Jew  objected  to  the  doc- 
trine on  the  ground  that  it  gave  a  license  to 
"  continue  in  sin  that  grace  might  abound  ;" 
and  the  Gampbellite  now,  objects  to  it  on  the 
same  ground.  As  the  answer  has,  in  part,  been 
already  given,  we  hope  to  dismiss  the  objec- 
tion with  a  few  brief  remarks. 

The  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone, 
cannot  lead  to  licentiousness,  because  the  faith 
by  which  we  are  justified,  is  not  alone  in  the 
heart  that  exercises  it.  In  receiving  Christ,  as 
our  old  divines  say,  "  faith  is  sola,  yet  not  soli- 
tariay  Faith  though  it  is  the  sole  condition  of 
pardon,  necessarily  includes  a  "  godly  sorrow" 
for  sin.  It  is  not  the  trust  of  a  careless  im- 
penitent sinner,  but  the  trust  of  one  who  sees 
his  sinfulness,  and  feels  his  danger ;  of  one  who 
being  "slain"  by  the  convincing  power  of  the 
word  and  spirit  of  God,  comes  to  him  humbly 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  73 

lamenting  his  past  disobedience,  and  confident- 
ly relying  upon  the  sacrifice  and  mediation  of 
Christ  for  pardon.  This  being  the  state  of 
mind  in  which  justifying  faith  is  exercised ;  and 
as  justification  does  not  terminate  our  probation 
and  unconditionally  guaranty  the  enjoyment  of 
eternal  life,  but  knowing  that  we  can  only  re- 
tain our  justified  state,  by  continuing  the  exer- 
cise of  that  faith  which  "  works  by  love"  and 
produces  the  fruits  of  holy  obedience,  it  follows, 
that  faith,  as  the  sole  condition  of  justification, 
furnishes  not  the  shadow  of  a  pretext  for  con- 
tinuing in  sin.  On  the  contrary,  as  it  is  by 
faith  alone  that  we  apprehend  and  lay  hold  of 
the  atonement  of  Christ  for  pardon  of  sin,  and 
deliverance  from  it,  this  doctrine  becomes  ex- 
clusively the  doctrine  of  holiness  and  good 
works. 

III.  But  here  a  charge  of  "  inconsistency" 
is  presented,  as  a  third  objection.  "If  repen- 
tance," says  the  Campbellite,  "goes  before 
pardon,  it  must  be  a  part  of  the  condition,  and 
consequently  it  cannot  be  by  faith  alone." 

Adverting  to  this  objection  formerly  we  pro- 
mised, in  noticing  it,  to  exonerate  the  Bible 
method  of  justification  from  this  charge  of 
"  inconsistency."  This  pledge  shall  now  be 
redeemed. 

Repentance  necessarily  precedes  justification 
— so,  also,  does  prayer.  The  humble  penitent 
ought  to  pray,  and  will  pray.  Mr.  Campbell, 
it  is  true,  would  deprive  him  of  this  privilege, 
but  the  Scriptures  grant  it  to  him,  and  make 
4  G 


74  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

it  his  duty.  Repentance  and  prayer,  then, 
necessarily  go  before  pardon ;  but  they  are 
not  necessary,  as  forming  a  part  of  the 
condition  on  which  God  remits  sin,  but  as  pre- 
paratory to  the  exercise  of  that  condition.  No 
man  can  believe  "with  the  heart  unto  righ- 
teousness," until  he  has  repented  and  prayed. 
To  use  figurative  language,  repentance,  though 
not  the  condition  of  justification,  is  the  road 
the  sinner  must  travel  in  order  to  arrive  at  that 
condition.  The  following  supposed  case,  will 
clearly  illustrate  our  meaning.  The  congress 
of  the  United  States  pass  a  law  requiring  every 
revolutionary  soldier  to  sign  his  name,  or  make 
his  m_ark  on  the  pension  list,  in  the  city  of 
Washington  as  the  condition  on  which  he  shall 
receive  his  pension.  Yonder  is  a  veteran  of 
'76,  who  resides  500  miles  from  said  city, 
which  he  must  travel  before  he  can  perform  the 
condition.  He  starts  and  arrives  at  the  seat  of 
government,  but  this  does  not  entitle  him  to  the 
pension,  nor  is  it  any  part  of  the  terms  on 
which  he  is  to  receive  it.  His  pension  depends 
on  his  signature  alone.  Thus  the  journey, 
though  necessary  to  bring  him  to  the  point 
where  he  can  fulfill  the  required  condition  of 
the  law,  does  not  itself  constitute  any  part  of 
that  requirement. 

Now  apply  this  to*the  case  before  us,  and 
the  objection  will  disappear.  God  requires 
faith,  only,  as  the  condition  of  pardon.  But 
the  sinner  is  so  entirely  alienated,  and  has 
wandered  so  far  astray,  that  he  cannot  comply 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  75 

with  this  requirement  until  he  return  by  the 
road  of  repentance.  But  though  he  repent  till 
his  eyes  weep  blood,  it  does  not  obtain  his  par- 
don. It  only  brings  him  to  that  state  of  mind, 
and  to  that  sense  of  his  helpless  condition, 
which  prepares  him  for  the  exercise  of  that  trust 
in,  and  reliance  upon  the  merits  of  a  crucified 
Savior,  which  justifying  faith  implies.  No 
man  is  forgiven  until  he  believes  "  v/ith  the 
heart;"  and  no  man  who  thus  believes,  can  re- 
main unforgiven.  Hence,  repentance,  though 
it  precede  justification,  is  only  necessary  to 
prepare  the  mind  for  the  exercise  of  the  faith, 
which  alone  is  the  condition  of  pardon. 

Lastly,  we  are  told  that  "to  speak  of  the 
^existence  of  repentance  before  faith,  involves  the 
absurdity  of  making  the  knowledge  of  sin  pre- 
cede the  knowledge  of  law."  The  difficulty 
here,  is  only  imaginary,  being  predicated  upon 
a  mistaken  notion  of  the  nature  of  that  faith 
which  the  Scriptures  connect  with  justification. 
If  faith  in  this  sense  was  nothing  more  than 
the  assent  of  the  mind  to  the  truth  of  the  gospel 
facts,  as  our  opponents  teach,  then  indeed,  to 
speak  of  repentance  before  faith,  would  be  ab- 
surd. But  it  was  shown  in  a  former  number 
that  this  view  of  faith  is  defective,  and  falls 
short  of  the  Scriptural  definition.  Let  it  suf- 
fice for  the  present  to  observe,  that  the  faith  of 
assent,  a  cordial  belief  of  the  testimony  of 
God,  under  the  influence  of  divine  grace,  is 
sufficient  to  produce  serious  consideration  of 
our  ways,  and  sorrowful  conviction  of  the  evil 


76  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

and  danger  of  sin  ;  we  then  turn  to  God  with 
contrite  hearts,  and  earnest  prayers  for  mercy. 
This  is  called  "  repentance  toward  God  ;"  and 
this  prepares  us  for  the  exercise  of  that  "  faith  in 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  which  combines  with 
the  assent  of  the  mind,  the  consent  of  the  will, 
and  the  reliance  of  the  affections,  and  which 
in  the  economy  of  Heaven,  is  made  the  sole 
condition  of  our  pardon. 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  77 


CHAPTER  III. 

DIVINE  AGENCY— THE  SPIRIT. 

Campbellism  rejects  Divine  Agency  on  the  heart — in 
connecting  Remission  with  Baptism,  like  Roman 
Catholicism,  it  contradicts  Paul — it  enjoins  an  impossi- 
ble term  of  Salvation — Campbellite  doctrine  of  Assu- 
rance— fallacy  of  inferring  our  Acceptance  from  our 
Baptism — cases  Exemplifying  the  foregoing — Mr.  C 
quoted — Irreverent  and  Blasphemous  language  of 
Campbellites  respecting  the  Spirit — Scripture  evidence 
of  his  direct  influence  on  the  heart — assurance  of  God's 
favor  by  the  Spirit — evangelical  Protestants  are  sub- 
stantially agreed,  on  this  point. 

The  principles  previously  established  prove, 
that  Mr.  Campbell's  "  ancient  gospel"  is  not 
quite  so  "ancient"  as  the  New  Testament;  and 
we  did  not  originally  design  to  pursue  the  sub- 
ject any  farther.  But  the  dangerous  tendency 
of  this  theory  will  justify,  if  indeed  it  does  not 
require,  something  more  ;  and  having  many  ar- 
guments and  objections  in  reserve,  we  proceed 
to  state  a  few  of  them. 

Campbellism  teaches  that  men  believe  the 
gospel,  "by  their  own  efforts,"  "after  the  same 
manner  that  they  believe  Rome  to  be  situated 
on  the  Tiber,"  and  that  "  that  is  saving  faith, 
which  purifies  the  heart ;"  then  they  "  reform," 
also  by  their  own  efforts ;  then  they  are  im- 
mersed by  the  efforts  of  another  person,  and 
g2 


78  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

thus  they  become  *'  new  creatures."     This  is 
the  Alpha  and  the  Omega  of  the  process  of  re- 
generation, according  to  Mr.  Campbell's  gospel. 
But  as  this  system  rejects  all  divine   agency 
upon  the  heart,  in  exciting  and  aiding  the  sin- 
ner to  turn   to  God,  and  in-  the   production  of 
faith,  it  is  obviously  unscriptural.     "  No   man 
can    come    unto   me  except  the  Father  draw 
him,"  says  the  Savior ;  and  the  Scriptures  tell 
us,  that  "  the  Lord  opened  the  heart  of  Lydia 
to  attend  to   the  "  things  which  were  spoken 
by  Paul."     Now,  the  things  which  Paul  spoke 
were    the    gospel  and    its    requirements ;    and 
these,  according  to    Campbellism,  are  all  that 
men  need  to  induce  and  enable  them  to  believe 
and  obey ;  but  in  Lydia's  case  another  agency 
was  necessary,  the  Lord  had  to  open  and  influ- 
ence her  heart  to  attend  to  those  things.     The 
command  to  pray  for  sinners,  necessarily,  pre- 
supposes the  exercise  of  a  divine  influence  upon 
their  hearts  ;  and  this  influence  is  clearly  taught 
by  St.  Paul  in  the  3d  chapter  of  1st  Corinthi- 
ans :   "  Who   then  is  Paul,  and  who   is  Apol- 
los,  but  ministers  by  whom  ye  believed,  even  as 
the  Lord  gave  to  every  man."     Here,  the  suc- 
cess of  their  ministry  is  not  ascribed  to  the 
natural  tendency  of  the  words  spoken,  but  to 
another  cause — "even  as  the  Lord  gave  to  eve- 
ry man."  For,  continues  the  Apostle,  *'  I  have 
planted,  Apollos  watered  ;  but  God  gave  the  in- 
crease."    But  how  did  God  give  the  increase, 
if  all  the  converting  power  was  in  the  Word  ? 
Paul  was  certainly  a  strong  preacher,  and  pro- 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  79 

claimed  the  gospel  with  an  ability  not  surpassed 
by  Mr.  Campbell,  or  any  of  his  followers.  He 
also  possessed  miraculous  gifts  and  powers. 
But  neither  his  preaching,  nor  his  miracles  were 
.  efficacious  in  saving  souls,  and  increasing  the 
church,  till  God  sent  his  spirit  to  convince  of 
sin,  and  bring  the  sinner  to  the  cross  of  the  Sa- 
vior for  pardon.  Thus  the  great  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles,  in  his  efforts  to  reform  the  world,  more 
modest  than  the  aposdes  of  Campbellism,  in 
their  reformation,  repelled  the  idea  that  the 
conversion  of  his  hearers  was  the  effect  of  his 
preaching,  irrespective  of  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

In  this  passage  a  divine  influence  not  con- 
tained in  the  word  preached,  is  represented  as 
accompanying  and  rendering  it  productive  ;  and 
our  Apostle  in  a  few  words,  on  another  occa- 
sion, demolished  the  notion,  that  saving  faith  is 
exercised  solely  by  our  own  efforts.  In  Col.  ii. 
12,  the  sinner  is  represented  as  being  brought 
from  the  condemnation  of  sin,  "through  the  faith 
of  the  operation  of  God."  That  faith,  then,  by 
which  "  our  old  man  is  crucified,"  and  through 
which  we  are  raised  to  "newness  of  life," 
is  "  of  the  operation  of  God,"  and  not  of  our 
own  unaided  efforts. 

But  do  not  understand  us,  that  God  believes 
for  the  sinner,  or  that  He  compels  him  to  be- 
lieve. Such  absurdities  do  not  disgrace  our 
creed.  Man  is  so  "far  gone  from  original 
righteousness"  that  he  has  not  the  ability  of 
himself,  by  his  own  efforts,  to  exercise  that  re- 


80  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

liame  upon  a  crucified  Savior,  which  is  impli- 
ed in  believing  "with  the  heart  unto  righteous- 
ness." Hence  the  necessity  for  a  divine  agen- 
cy to  grant  him  the  power  to  repent  and  believe. 
The  power  to  exercise  faith  is,  therefore,  the 
"gift"  and  "operation  of  God."  But  the 
grace  or  ability  to  believe,  does  not  necessitate 
the  exercise  of  that  ability.  God  gives  the 
former  and  holds  the  sinner  accountable  for  the 
latter.  And  thus,  saving  faith  is  both  the  gift 
of  God,  and  the  act  of  the  creature. 

Another  objection  to  the  doctrine  which  in- 
separably connects  immersion  with  remission 
of  sins,  is,  that  like  the  Catholic  system,  it 
contradicts  the  Apostle,  who  says,  "  It  is  God 
that  justifieth." 

The  Catholic,  while  he  nominally  concedes 
that  God  only  can  forgive  sins,  declares  that 
sins  can  only  be  forgiven  through  the  agency  of 
the   priest  who  baptizes  the  penitent,  or  the 
priest  who  receives  his  confessions ;  and  the 
Campbellite,  while  he  disclaims  all  design  of 
robbing  God  of  the  glory  of  remitting  sins, 
proclaims  that  remission  of  sins  is  inseparably 
connected  with  the   performance  of  an  ordi- 
nance, a  work  which  man  has  to  do.     But,  un- 
fortunately for   their   propagators,  neither   of 
these  schemes  can  be  reconciled  to  the  declara- 
tion of  the  Apostle.     For  the  confessor  and  the 
baptizer,  being  free   agents,  may  refuse  to  act, 
in  which  case  there  could  be  no  forgiveness, 
and,  dying  in  that  situation,  the  penitent  must 
be  lost  in  spite  of  the  willingness  of  a  merci- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  81 

ful  God  to  save  him.  Thus  the  Catholic  priest, 
and  the  Campbellite  are  beheld  standing  on  the 
same  ground,  teaching  the  traditions  of  men  in- 
stead of  the  commandments  of  God,  and  sub- 
stantially claiming  a  greater  agency  in  the  jus- 
tification of  the  sinner,  than  they  concede  to 
their  Maker.  But  St.  Paul  tells  us  plainly, 
*'  It  is  one  God  who  shall  justify  the  circum- 
cision 5?/ /ai^A,  and  the  uncircumcision  through 
faith.^'  We  prefer  his  opinion  to  both  of 
these. 

Again,  we  object  to  the  immersion  theory 
for  pardon,  on  the  ground  that  it  charges  Him, 
in  whom  "  were  hid  the  treasures  of  wis- 
dom," with  the  folly  of  having  failed  to  suit 
his  religion  to  the  circumstances  of  many  for 
whom  it  was  intended. 

Every  believer  in  the  Bible  will  admit  that 
Christianity  is  designed  to  be  universal,  and  that 
it  will  prevail  wherever  man  is  found.  The 
requirements  of  this  religion  must,  therefore, 
be  practicable  in  all  countries,  and  attainable 
under  all  circumstances.  Now  we  do  not 
question  the  adaptation  of  Christianity  to  all  the 
countries,  and  states,  and  conditions  of  men ; 
but  Mr.  Campbell's  views  of  Christianity  are 
very  different.  No  man  can  be  a  christian  with- 
out remission  of  sins,  and  remission,  according 
to  Mr.  Campbell,  can  only  be  had  through 
immersion ;  but  immersion  is  neither  attaina- 
ble in  all  countries,  nor  practicable  under  all 
circumstances. 

In  the  Arctic  regions,  where,  during  two 
4* 


82  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

thirds  of  the  year,  the  water  is  all  frozen,  and 
in  the  torrid  plains  of  Africa  and  Asia  where 
the  supplies  of  water  are  barely  sufficient  to 
sustain  life,  immersion  is  impossible.  In  our 
own  land,  the  cold  is  sometimes  so  severe  that 
immersion  is  impracticable  and  dangerous  ;  and 
sometimes,  the  drought  prevails  till  the  pools  and 
streams  have  disappeared  in  many  parts  of  the 
country,  and  it  is  rendered  extremely  difficult, 
if  not  impossible,  to  find  water  for  this  cere- 
mony. Add  to  this,  that  immersion  is  fre- 
quently forbidden  by  the  situation  of  the  peni- 
tent. Numerous  cases  of  persons  in  delicate 
and  declining  health,  might  be  adduced.  Let 
one  suffice.  See  that  lady  in  the  last  stage  of 
consumption.  Reduced  to  a  skeleton,  her 
strength  is  gone,  her  days  are  numbered.  Know- 
ing that  she  must  shortly  appear  before  her 
Creator,  in  a  world  of  spirits,  and  feeling  her- 
self a  sinner,  every  power  of  thought  and  de- 
sire of  soul  is  directed  to  Him  for  mercy.  But 
she  has  never  been  immersed,  and  now  she 
cannot  be  ;  hence,  she  must  die  unforgiven,  and 
be  eternally  excluded  from  heaven. 

We  are  aware,  that  Campbellism  attempts  to 
evade  this  result,  by  supposing  it  possible,  as 
immersion  in  her  case  is  out  of  the  question, 
for  her  to  be  saved  without  it.  But  this  misera- 
ble evasion  amounts  to  a  surrender  of  the  cause 
which  it  is  designed  to  sustain.  God  has  re- 
vealed but  one  method  of  pardoning  sin.  Wher- 
ever the  gospel  is  preached,  its  terms  must  be 
complied  with,  or  there  can  be  no  remission. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  83 

The  case  of  this  lady  is  in  some  sense,  the 
case  of  all  sinners.  Though  she  cannot  be 
immersed  now  she  is  dying,  she  has  neglected 
many  opportunities  of  attending  to  this  while  in 
health.  Other  sinners  do  no  more,  and  incur 
no  more  guilt  by  their  neglect  than  she  has 
done.  Therefore,  to  admit  that  she  may  be 
saved  without  immersion,  is  to  admit  the  truth, 
that  all  may  be  saved  without  it. 

Indeed,  we  cannot  conceive  of  a  greater  ab- 
surdity, than  to  suppose  salvation  possible  with- 
out immersion,  and  yet  believe  Campbellism  to 
be  true.  It  involves  the  absurdity  of  imagining 
the  salvation  of  one  who  is  "  unjustilied,  unad- 
opted, unsanctified,  unconverted,  unregenerated, 
not  born  of  God,"  "  lost  to  all  christian  life 
and  enjoyment,"  and  destitute  of  "  the  peace 
of  God,  and  the  hope  of  heaven."  For  this, 
according  to  Mr.  Campbell,  is  the  wretched  sit- 
.  nation  of  the  unimmersed. 

This  system  then  amounts  to  the  declaration, 
"no  immersion — no  salvation."  And  as  the 
lady  above  mentioned,  cannot  be  immersed,  she 
cannot  be  saved.  And  so  with  all  who  die  in 
those  countries,  at  those  times,  and  under  cir- 

■  cumstances  that  render  a  resort  to  this  mode  of 
baptism  inexpedient  or  impossible.  Let  it  also 
be  observed  that  the  neglect  of  the  baptizer,  or 
the  postponement  of  his  work  for  a  day,  or  a 

■  single  hour,  must  endanger  the  soul  of  the  ap- 
plicant, and  may  occasion  its  final  ruin.  A  fit 
of  apoplexy  or  something  else  calls  him  sudden- 
ly away  ;  and  however  deep  his  penitence,  fer- 


84  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

vent  his  prayers,  and  strong  his  faith,  he  is  lost, 
because  the  baptizer  neglected  his  duty. 

Such  are  the  unavoidable  consequences  of 
that  system  which  we  oppose.  It  charges  the 
"  only  wise  God"  with  the  folly  of  having  es- 
tablished a  religion,  intended  for  universal  ap- 
plication, which  can  never  be  practiced  in  many 
parts  of  the  earth,  and  which  is  unsuited  to  the 
wants  and  conditions  of  helpless  man  ;  and  it 
involves  the  absurdity  of  making  the  soul's  sal- 
vation to  depend  upon  the  will  of  the  baptizer, 
instead  of  the  faith  of  the  penitent,  and  the 
mercy  of  God.  Could  such  a  system  ema- 
nate from  the  Fountain  of  wisdom ;  or  is  it 
the  offspring  of  some  bewildered  visionary, 
"  ignorant  of  the  righteousness  of  God,"  and 
laboring  to  "  establish  his  own  righteous- 
ness ?" 

Let  us  now,  in  contrast  with  Mr.  Campbell's 
substitute,  look  at  God's  plan  for  remission,  as 
revealed  in  the  Scriptures,  and  defended  in  these 
essays. 

Men  are  sinners.  The  gospel  finds  them  in 
this  condition,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  convinces 
them  of  it,  by  visiting  every  heart,  and  con- 
necting His  secret  influences  with  the  external 
means  of  grace,  to  awaken  the  sinner  to  a  sense 
of  his  danger,  and  win  his  heart  to  God.  By 
this  operation  of  the  "good  Spirit,"  in  con- 
junction with  the  Word,  read  or  expounded, 
conviction  of  the  fact  of  sin  is  produced. 
Yielding  to  this  conviction,  the  sinner  is  brought 
to  apprehend  the  penalty  of  the  law,  and  pain- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  85 

ful  anticipations  of  the  consequences  of  sin  fol- 
low ;  and  thus  he  is  moved  by  a  sense  of  his 
danger  to  look  out  for  a  remedy  ;  and  this  be- 
ing disclosed  in  the  same  revelation,  and  unfold- 
ed by  the  same  Spirit  from  whose  secret  in- 
fluences he  has  received  this  sense  of  his  dan- 
ger, he  confesses  his  sins  before  God,  and  like 
the  publican  in  the  temple,  exclaims,  "  God  be 
merciful  to  me  a  sinner."  And  thus,  as  was 
shown  in  our  last,  his  penitence  and  prayers, 
though  not  the  condition  of  pardon,  prepare  his 
mind  for  the  exercise  of  that  act  of  faith,  which 
the  apostle  calls  believing  *'  with  the  heart  f^ 
in  which  he  at  once  acknowledges  his  own  un- 
worthiness  and  helplessness,  and  flies  with  con- 
fidence to  the  mercy  of  his  offended  God,  pro- 
claimed "through  the  redemption  that  is  in 
Christ  Jesus." 

Now,  though  as   depraved  beings,  we  have 
not  the   natural  ability  thus  to  come  to  Christ 
and  believe,  yet  this  is  compensated  in  the  fact 
that  the  grace  of  the  Holy  Spirit  imparts  the 
I  ability  to  all  who  desire  and  seek  it ;  and  hence 
j  if  we  are  not  saved  the  fault  is  wholly  our  own. 
'  All   who  improve  the  grace  that  is  given,  and 
I  yield  to  the  drawings  of  the  Spirit,  are  aided 
I  and  graciously  excited,  confidently  to  rely  upon 
'  the  promises  of  God,  and  with  a  believing  heart 
j  to  "  lay  hold  on  the  hope  set  before  them."  And 
!  he  who  thus  believes  is  not  dependent  on  "  an 
;  arm  of  flesh"  to  take  him  "  down  into  the  water" 
and  obtain  his  pardon ;  he  has  already  obtain- 
ed it  "  by  grace,  through  faith,"  without  bap- 
H 


86  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

tism,  or  any  other  "  works*  of  righteousness." 
This  is  God's  plan  of  justifying  the  ungodly; 
a  plan  which  manifests  his  grace  and  goodness 
to  fallen  man  by  placing  the  conditions  of  par- 
don within  the  reach  of  every  one  who  hears 
the  gospel,  so  that  no  external  circumstance  can 
prevent  a  compliance.  "  Whosoever  Vv'ill"  may 
"  come,  and  partake  of  the  waters  of  life  freely." 
Though  he  be   perishing  amid  the  perpetual 


*  We  were  recently  favored  v.'ith  the  perusal  of  a  let- 
ter from  a  Campbellite  teacher,  in  wliich  it  is  denied  that 
the  New  Testament  speaks  of  "  repentance,  baptism,  the 
Lord's  Supper,  or  prayer,  or  praise,  or  preaching,  or  other 
christian  duties,  as  being  works ;"  and  asserted  that, 
"  wherever  tvorks  are  mentioned,  it  is  in  reference  to 
something  else  than  the  gospel."  Really  this  is  something 
we  did  not  previously  understand.  We  had  been  so  igno- 
rant as  to  suppose  that  St.  Paul,  when  he  exhorted  the  Co- 
rinthians to  be  "  always  abounding  in  the  -ivork  of  the 
Lord,"  intended  to  enjoin  the  duties  of  the  gospel;  and  that 
the  command  to  the  church  at  Ephesus,  "Remember,  there- 
fore from  whence  thou  art  fallen,  and  repent,  and  do  thy' 
first  -works,"  did  mean  that  they  should  repent  or  pray, 
or  perform  "  other  christian  duties."  These  were  our 
opinions  ;  and  under  the  influence  of  a  "purblind  theolo- 
gy," this  state  of  ignorance  might  have  remained,  but  for 
the  labors  of  this  sapient  reformer,  who  has  discovered 
that  "  to  r-ork  out  our  own  salvation"  does  not  require  the 
performance  of  "  christian  duties,"  but  works  of  Jewish 
or  Turkish  or  Pagan  requirement,  for  wherever  the  apos- 
tles "  mention  works,  it  is  in  reference  to  something  else 
than  the  gospel." 

To  be  serious:  that  system  which  for  its  support  re- 
quires its  advocates  thus  to  climb  to  the  pinnacle  of  the 
superlative  degree  of  nonsense,  cannot  be  of  God.  If  it 
can  survive  the  present  generation,  we  are  much  mistaken. 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  87 

snows  of  the  north,  or  scorched  by  the  verticnl 
rays  of  an  African  sun,  where  there  is  no  water, 
or  sick  and  at  the  point  of  death, 

"  In  every  condition,  in  sickness  or  health, 
In  poverty's  vale,  or  abounding  in  wealth," 

the  penitent  may  comply  with  God's  terms,  be- 
lieve with  the  heart,  receive  remission  of  sins, 
and  go  home  to  glory. 

It  is  thus  seen,  that  the  Scripture  scheme  of 
justification  by  faith  alone,  displays  the  good- 
ness and  wisdom  of  God,  in  its  admirable  ad- 
aptation to  the  wants  and  conditions  of  man, 
and  that  it  is  every  way  worthy  of  its  Divine 
Author;  while  the  immersion  scheme,  involves 
so  many  difficulties  and  absurdities,  and  is  so 
entirely  defective  in  meeting  the  wants  of  the 
human  family,  that  it  is  with  difficulty  we  can 
assign  it  so  respectable  an  origin,  as  the  imagi- 
nations of  men  possessing  common  sense  and 
sound  judgment. 

An  assurance,  or  comfortable  persuasion  of 
'  regeneration  and  adoption  is,  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, promised  to  those  who  receive  remission 
of  sins.  "  Being  justified  by  faith  we  have  peace 
with  God."  Though  the  blessings  of  regenera- 
tion and  adoption  are  different  from  each  other, 
and  from  justification,  yet  they  are  not  to  be 
separated,  because  they  take  place  at  the  same 
time,  and  they  all  enter  into  the  experience  of 
the  same  individual ;  so  that  no  man  is  justified 
without  being  regenerated  and  adopted,  and  no 
man  is  regenerated  and  made  a  son  of  God, 
*  who  is  not  justified.  And  he  who  thus  becomes 


88  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

"  a  new  creature"  is  lurnislied  with  the  evi- 
dence that  he  is  freed  from  condemnation.  I'hus 
"  the  peace  of  God"  is  inseparably  connected 
with  remission  of  sins.  A  similar  connection 
obtains  in  Mr.  Campbell's  system.  But  as  his 
method  of  obtaining  pardon  is  unauthorized  by 
Scripture,  so,  also,  is  his  method  of  arriving  at 
a  knowledge  of  sins  forgiven. 

His  followers  are  taught  to  predicate  an  assu- 
rance of  their  adoption  upon  the  fact  that  they 
have  been  immersed,  and  thereby  to  make  im- 
mersion the  means  of  obtaining  pardon,  and  the 
principal  evidence   that  they  are  pardoned. — 
They  reason  thus  :  "  If  a  good  and  solvent  man 
were  to  promise  me  a  sum  of  money,  upon  the 
condition  that  I  performed  a  certain  work,  hav- 
ing confidence  in  his  honesty  and  ability,  and 
knowing  that  I  had  complied  with  the  condition, 
I  would  be  sure  of  tlie  reward  ;  and  as   God, 
whose  word  cannot  fail,  has  promised  remission 
of  sins  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  consequent 
upon  baptism,  I  know  that  my  obedience  has 
secured  my  pardon  and  my  adoption."     This 
kind  of  logic  is  in  perfect  cliaracter  v,dth  the 
system  they  have  embraced,  and  by  it  they  at- 
tempt to  reason  themselves   into  the  belief  that 
*'all  is  well."     Having  previously  shown  that 
the  Scriptures  do  not  promise  remission  of  sins, 
in  the   sense   it  is  here  understood,  upon  the 
condition  of  baptism,  we  proceed  to  prove  the 
reasoning  here  adopted  to  be  fallacious,  and  that 
the  conclusion  drawn  from  it  is  dangerous. 
If  the  above  argument  will  hold  good  in  the 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  89 

case  to  which  it  is  applied,  it  must  be  equally- 
valid  in  all  similar  cases  ;  consequently,  as  God 
has  promised    ''  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them   that 
asA;,"  and  salvation  to  such  as  "c«Z/upon  the 
name  of  the  Lord,"  he  who  has  prayed  is  au- 
thorized to  infer,  that  he  has  the  Holy  Spirit 
and  is  saved.     But  this  conclusion  is  no  where 
warranted  by  the  Word  of  God,  nor  can  it  be 
reconciled  to  the  experiences  of  christians  ;  for 
though  we  may  receive  the  "Holy  Spirit"  and 
salvation   from  sin,   in  the  act  of  prayer,  it  is 
not  true  that  these  blessings  are  always  receiv- 
ed in  the  performance  of  that  duty ;  and  hence, 
to  conclude  ourselves  pardoned  and  adopted  be- 
cause we  have  prayed,  is  wholly  unjustifiable. 
And  yet,  this  process  has  more  to  support  it, 
than  that  upon  which  the  Campbellite  predi- 
cates his  confidence  ;  for  the  Scriptures  present 
prayer  as  having  a  connection  with  remission 
of  sins,  which  they  no  where  ascribe  to  baptism. 
They  inform  us  of  some,  at  least,  who  were 
pardoned  and  saved  without  being  baptized,  but 
we  have  yet  to  learn  that  any  one  ever  was  par- 
doned without  previous  repentance  and  prayer. 
The  fallacy  of  the  attempt  to  infer  our  accep- 
tance with  God  from  a  knowledge  of  our  bap- 
tism, is  further  seen  in  the  fact,  that  every  bap- 
tized individual  has  the  same  kind  of  evidence, 
and  on  the  same   ground  may  prove  himself  a 
a  child  of  God ;  a  position  so  entirely  untenable 
that  it  carries  its  own  refutation.     Mr.  Camp- 
bell, indeed,  is  aware  of  this  difficulty  ;  but  in 
attempting  to  guard  against  it,  he  has  left  the 
h2 


90  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

point   sufficiently   vulnerable    to    sustain   our 
charge.     After  having  asserted  concerning  the 
apostolic  age,  that  "  no  person  was  said  to  be 
converted  until  he  was  'immersed ;  and  [[that] 
all  persons  who  were  immersed,  were  said  to 
be  converted,"  and  assured  his  followers,  that 
"  when  they  were  led  down  into  the  water,  and 
concealed  in  its  womb,"  that  "there  their  con- 
sciences were  released,  and  their  old  sins  purg- 
ed away,"  he  anticipates  the  objection  that  his 
doctrine  would  lead  to  the  conclusion  that  every 
immersed  person  is  born  of  God,  and  tries  to 
evade  it  by  saying,  "If  the  immersed  person 
do  not  believe  the  gospel,  he  is,  to  speak  after 
the  manner  of  men,  still-born  ;  but  if  he  believe 
the   gospel  he   is  born  of  God,   whenever  he 
is  born  of  water."*    Now,  bear  in  mind,  that 
Mr.  Campbell  admits  no  higher  degree  of  faith 
than  a  historical  belief  of  the  gospel  facts,  just 
as  we  "  believe  Rome  to  be   situated  on  the 
Tiber,"  and  all  who  thus  believe,  he  asserts, 
to  be  "  born  of  God  when  they  are  born  of 
water."     And  as  every  sinner  in  Christendom, 
except  he  be  a  sheer  infidel,  believes  the  gospel 
facts,  it  follows  according  to  Mr.  Campbell's 
own  showing,  that  every  immersed  individual, 
unless  he  contemn  the  Bible,  and  for  some  sin- 
ister design  act  the  part  of  a  base  and  consci- 
ous hypocrite,  has   evidence  that  he  is  born  of 


*  These  quotations,  made  from  memory  from  Mr.  C/s 
"  Millennial  Harbinger,"  may  not  be  verbatim,  but  they 
are  substantially  correct. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  91 

God,  and  adopted  into  his  family.    Such  is  the 
conclusion. 

But  this  is  equally  repugnant  to  gospel  facts, 
and  to  facts  of  every  day  occurrence.  Simon, 
the  sorcerer,  "  believed  (the  gospel  facts  no 
doubt)  and  was  baptized,"  but  remained  "  in 
the  gall  of  bitterness,  and  in  the  bond  of  in- 
iquity ;"  and,  alas  !  had  he  lived  to  the  present 
day,  how  many  might  he  have  found  to  keep 
him  in  countenance  !  It  is  painful  to  reflect  that 
numbers  with  a  historic  belief  (which  Simon 
certainly  had)  have  been  led  down  into  the 
water,  and  "  intelligently"  and  with  the  "  full 
faith"  of  A.  Campbell,  immersed  for  remission 
of  sins,  who  came  out  of  the  water,  as  they 
went  into  it,  unpardoned  sinners,  and  whose 
works  have,  ever  since,  declared  them  to  be 
destitute  of  the  "washing  of  regeneration"  and 
the  "  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

In  presenting  this  difficulty  we  were  once  ad- 
monished by  an  opponent,  to  look  at  home,  and 
remember  that  the  members  of  our  own  denom- 
ination sometimes  fail  to  yield  the  fruits  of  the 
Spirit.  This  is  a  lamentable  truth;  and  one 
which  we  neither  deny,  nor  attempt  to  extenu- 
ate ;  but  the  cases  are  entirely  dissimilar.  We 
have  no  "  institution"  which  enables  us  to  pro- 
nounce to  a  certainty  that  the  sins  of  our  mem- 
bers "  are  purged  away."  Content  to  stand 
on  gospel  principles,  we  tell  men  "  to  examine 
themselves,"  and  then  we  judge  of  them  "  by 
their  fruits ;"  but  Mr.  Campbell  has  assumed  a 
different  ground.  He  has  "discovered"  among 


92  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

"  the  rubbish  of  human  traditions,  an  institution 
inseparably  connected  with  remission  of  sins, 
like  which  there  was  no  institution  since  the 
world  began  ;"  and  this,  he  tells  us,  "  is  chris- 
tian immersion,  sometimes  called  conversion." 
In  this,  then,  he  claims  an  infallible  rule,  which 
enables  him  to  pronounce  all  his  members  (hy- 
pocritical infidels  excepted)  really  converted  ; 
and  by  which  every  immersed  person  may  know 
of  a  truth,  that  he  is  an  adopted  child  of  God. 
But  Campbellites  and  the  world  do  know,  that 
multitudes,  who,  in  all  probability,  cordially 
believed  the  gospel  facts,  and  were  immersed 
for  remission,  have  no  more  of  Christianity  than 
the  name.  Therefore,  this  rule  will  not  apply 
to  all ;  and  of  course  it  is  good  for  nothing. 

Some  of  our  opponents  here  make  another  ef- 
fort to  escape,  by  asserting  that  they,  like  us, 
believe  in  the  possibility  of  apostatizing  from 
the  favor  of  God.  But  this  effort,  is,  also,  abor- 
tive. "  If  any  man  have  not  the  spirit  of  Christ," 
he  cannot  lose  it ;  and  he  who  has  that  spirit 
will  manifest  it  by  its  fruits,  as  pointed  out  by 
the  apostle.  But  many  of  the  immersed,  so  far 
from  having  shown  any  of  the  fruits  of  the 
Spirit,  by  a  pious  walk,  have  ever  continued  a 
notorious  indulgence  in  the  "  works  of  the 
flesh  ;"  and  hence,  as  they  never  possessed  the 
grace  or  favor  of  God,  in  the  sense  of  pardon, 
they  could  not  have  lost  it.  By  way  of  con 
iirmation,  take  the  following  statements  : 

During  the  prevalence  of  cholera  in  Kentucky,  I  o( 
when  the  water  mania  was  at  its  zenith,  the  I  ii 


CAMtBELLISM    EXPOSED.  93 

Campbellite   teachers  labored  to  convince  the 
people  that  the  Almighty  was  angry  with  them 
because  they  were   disobedient,    and  that   he 
would  speedily  destroy  them,  unless  they  sub- 
mitted to  be  immersed.    Tliese  assertions  were 
received  and  believed,  and  hence  hundreds  of 
poor  deluded  sinners,  instead  of  humbling  them- 
selves before    God,    "  with   fasting,   and  with 
weeping,  and  with  mourning,"  fled  for  refuge 
to  the  water,  and  there,  by  making  "  one  low 
bow,"  expected  to  obtain  salvation.     This  act 
sufficiently  proved  their   sincerity.     But   how 
few  of  them  have  since  manifested  more  of  the 
"fruits  of  the  Spirit,"  than  are  seen  in  the  char- 
acter of  the  unbaptized  Mussulman  ?    A  case 
in  point.    A  young  man,  who  during  that  time 
was  immersed  for  remission,  was  guilty  of  pro- 
fane swearing  a  few  hours  after  his  baptism ; 
the  same  week,  was  seen  in  a  state  of  intoxica- 
tion, and  continued  a  course  of  intemperance 
till  it  sent  his  soul  to  eternity.     Now  it  is  next 
to  an  impossibility  to  believe,  that  any  one  in 
his   situation,  expecting  every  day  to  be  called 
to  a  world  of  spirits  by  the  dreaded  epidemic, 
could  be  immersed  from   hypocritical   or  dis- 
honest motives.  He  certainly  believed  the  gospel 
facts  as  developed  by  his  teacher,  had  all  the 
faith  Mr.  Campbell  requires  ;  and  if  immersion 
is,  to  any  man,  proof  of  his  being  a  child  of 
God,  it  was  this  to  him  ;  but  he  continued  to 
"  live  after  the  flesh,"  and  showed  the  spirit 
of  "  the  wicked  one,"  even  from  the  hour  of 
his  baptism. 


m. 


94  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

Another  case.     In  the  county  of  B— ,   in 

this  state,  two  men,  whom  we  will  call  A  and 
B,  conversing  about  Mr.  Campbell  and  his  ibl- 
lowei-s,  A  declared  that  he  would  join  them  the 
next  Sabbath.  This  was  questioned  by  B,  and 
finally  the  sum  of  five  dollars  was  staked  upon 
the  issue.  Sabbath  came,  and  A  presented  him- 
self as  a  candidate  for  the  saving  ordinance. 
B  was  also  present,  and  informed  the  baptizer 
of  the  pending  wager.  But  as  A  averred  his 
belief  of  the  gospel  facts,  and  demanded  bap- 
tism for  remission  of  sins,  the  ceremony  pro- 
ceeded, and  B  lost  his  money.*  This  man, 
though  he  honestly  believed  the  gospel  facts, 
could  not  have  been  pardoned  ;  for  he  not  only 
regarded  "iniquity  in  his  heart,"  but  was  im- 
mersed with  the  design  of  putting  the  "  wages 
of  sin"  into  his  pocket:  and  yet  he  can  plead 
his  baptism  in  evidence  of  his  pardon,  Vv^ith  as 
much  confidence  as  any  other  Campbellite. 

It  is  presumable  that  all,  who,  upon  being 
sincerely  awakened  by  the  spirit  of  C4od,  fly  to 
the  water  for  relief,  learn  by  sad  experience  the 
folio v/ing  truth  : 

"  Nor  running  brook,  nor  flood,  nor  sea, 
Can  wash  the  dismal  stain  away." 

At  any  rate,  we  have  had  information  of  some, 
who  after  their  baptism  declared  in  the  plainest 


*  Neither  this,  nor  the  case  before  named  came  under 
the  immediate  notice  of  the  writer  ;  but  he  received  both 
from  sources  which  he  considers  unquestionable. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  95 

manner  that  they  had  been  duped,  and  wofuUy 
disappomted. 

The  following  circumstance,  of  which  we 
were  recently  informed,  is  in  point.  A  gentle- 
man not  far  from  Cincinnati,  who  was  deeply 
penitent,  upon  hearing  a  proclamation  of  Mr. 
Campbell's  gospel,  believed  the  report,  and  re- 
joicing to  find  so  easy  a  road  to  heaven,  was 
immersed,  with  full  confidence  of  obtaining  re- 
lief from  a  guilty  conscience.  But,  alas  !  instead 
of  the  anticipated  "  peace  and  joy,"  he  felt, 
as  one  on  a  similar  occasion  expressed  himself, 
nothing  but  the  cold  water.  Being  sadly  de- 
ceived in  the  effects  of  the  operation,  he  did  not 
conceal  it  from  his  brethren ;  and  they,  suppos- 
ing, perhaps,  that  there  had  been  something 
defective  in  the  work,  advised  liim  to  try  it 
again  ;  but  not  relishing  the  proposal,  and  being 
disgusted  with  such  mummery,  he  concluded 
Christianity  to  be  a  mere  cheat,  and  by  turning 
infidel,  succeeded  for  a  time  in  stifling  his  con- 
victions. In  this  condition  he  went  to  a  camp 
meeting,  where  the  word  preached,  again  reach- 
ing his  heart,  he  sought  the  Lord  according  to 
his  Word,  by  repentance  and  prayer,  and 
learned  by  joyful  experience,  that  God  has 
power  to  forgive  sins,  "  by  grace"  "  through 
faith,"  wdthout  one  drop  of  water. 

Other  circumstances  and  cases,  in  character 
similar  to  those  above  mentioned,  might  be  ad- 
duced ;  but  we  forbear.  The  observant  reader, 
familiar  with  the  practical  operations  of  Camp- 
bellism,  needs  neither  arguments  nor  facts  to 


96  CAPJPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

convince  him  of  the  absurdity  of  the  attempt  to 
prove  that  an  individual  is  regenerated  because 
he  is  baptized.  Having  seen  the  entire  faihire 
of  a  burial  in  water  to  produce  holiness  of  life, 
he  is  prepared  to  smile  at  the  delusion,  and  to 
pity  the  condition  of  all  who  rely  upon  it. 

But  lest  some  should  suppose  our  coloring 
too  high,  and  imagine  that  Mr.  Campbell  does 
not  make  baptism  so  important  as  we  represent, 
we  give  another   quotation  from   his    writings. 
In  the  "  Debate    with  M'Calla,"  as  published 
by  Mr.   Campbell,  he  tells  us  that  God  "  ap- 
pointed baptism  to  be  to  everyone  that  believed 
the  record  he  has  given  of  his  Son,  a  formal 
pledge  on  his  part  of  that  believer's  personal 
acquittal  or  pardon ;  so  significant  and   so  ex- 
pressive, that  when  the  baptized  believer  rises 
out  of  the  water,  is  born  oftcaie'-,   enters  the 
world  the  second  time,  he  enters  it  as  innocenty 
as  clean,  as  unspotted  as  an  angel.     His  con- 
science is  purged  from  guilt,  his  body  is  wash- 
ed with  pure  water,  even  the  "washing  of  re- 
generation."     Here  the  Campbellite  is  taught 
by  his  leader,  that  baptism  is  a  formal  pledge 
of  his  pardon,  and  that  he  rose  from  the  water 
as   holy  as   an    angel.     And    certainly,   from 
such  a  beginning,  we  are  authorized  to  expect  a 
life  of  corresponding  holiness.    But  many  who 
thus  "entered  the   world  from   the  womb  of 
waters,"  "  as  innocent,  as  clean,  as  unspotted 
as  angels,"  really  appear  the  "  worse  for  mend- 
ing." Alas,  for  Christianity ! 

The  cases  mentioned  of  the  entire  failure  of 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  97 

the    "  regenerating   bath"    to    make    practical 
christians,  were  not  adduced  to  wound  the  feel- 
ings of  our  opponents.     To  sport  with  the  feel- 
ings of  any  man,  or  wantonly  to  oiTend  one  of 
the  "  little  ones"  of  God's  family,  forms  no  part 
of  our  design  in  writing  these  essays.     That 
some  whose  heads  have   been  bewildered  by 
Campbell's  dogmas,  are  sincere  christians,  we 
neither  doubt,  nor  wish  to  doubt;  but  we,  ne- 
vertheless, firmly  believe    that  those    dogmas 
never  did  make  a  christian,  and  never  can  make 
one.     And,  hence,  without  the  least  desire  to 
reproach  the  pious  of  that  sect,  by  charging 
them  with  the  sins  of  tlieir  brethren,  we  felt  it 
our  duty,  in  opposing  a  dangerous  departure 
from  "  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,"  to 
test  its  truth  by  inspecting  its  practical  effects. 
This  course  seemed  the  more  justifiable  from 
the    consideration  that  the  system  we  oppose 
teaches  men  to  consider  themselves  justified  and 
sanctified  because  they  have  been  baptized.   To 
show  the  insufficiency  of  this  kind  of  evidence, 
the  circumstances  referred  to  above,  were  intro- 
duced, and  we  still  look  upon  them  as  proof  of 
the  strongest  character.     For  certainly,  if  one 
individual    who   with    Mr.    Campbell's     "  full 
faith"  received  baptism  for  remission  of  sins, 
has  manifested  himself  to  be  still  in  the  "  gall 
of  bitterness,"  it  shows  to  ocular  demonstra- 
tion that  baptism  does  not  afford  evidence  of  a 
justified  state  ;  and  if  one  case  is  proof  so  deci- 
sive, who  can  resist  the  accumulated  testimony 
of  the  fact,  that  numbers,  perhaps  a  large  ma- 
5  I 


98  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

jority,  who  were  thus  "  washed"  have,  by 
continuing  ''to  wallow  in  the  mire  of  sin,'* 
manifested  a  total  destitution  of  the  christian 
graces  ? 

That  Mr.  Campbell  authorizes  his  followers 
to  consider  themselves  the  adopted  sons  of  God 
because  they  have  been  baptized,  was  shown  al- 
ready; and  that  they  take  him  at  his  word,  and  re- 
ly upon  his  instructions,  is  clearly  seen  in  their 
words  and  actions.    When  one  of  their  teachers 
was  asked  for  his  experience,  he  replied,  "  I 
believed  and  was  immersed,  and  this  is  all  the 
experience  I  have,  or  desire  to  have."  Another 
informed  his  hearers,  that  if  they  believed  the 
Bible  and  would  let  him  immerse    them,   he 
would  ensure  them  the  enjoyment  of  heaven ; 
that  he  would  plead  their  cause  in  the  day  of 
judgment,  by  stating  that  they  had  believed  and 
obeyed,  and  therefore  must  be  admitted  ;  and 
from  the  pulpit  we  have  frequently  heard  the  fol- 
lowing argument,  if  argument  it  may  be  called : 
"Men  may  be  happy  and  have  good  feelings 
in  imagining  their  sins  forgiven,  but  it  is  all 
delusion ;  the  immersed,  and  they  only,  have  a 
knowledge  of  forgiveness,  satisfactory  and  cer- 
tain.    Suppose  a  criminal  under  sentence  of 
death,  sues  for  a  reprieve,  which  is  granted  upon 
condition  that  he  depart  from  the  state  within 
ten  days  ;  he  may  have  the  reprieve  in  his  pos- 
session,   with    the    governor's   signature,   and 
might  therefore  imagine  himself  secure,  but  it 
is  certain  he  is  not  pardoned  until  he  pass  the 
boundary  of  the  state.    So  it  is  with  the  sinner, 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  99 

who  is  promised  a  pardon  upon  the  condition 
of  a  '  believing  immersion.'  As  soon  as  he  is 
immersed,  he  has  evidence  of  forgiveness ;  and 
until  then,  whatever  may  be  his  feelings,  or 
his  hopes,  they  are  delusive,  and  he  is  under 
condemnation.  But  when  he  has  obeyed,  he  is 
assured  of  his  pardon — not  a  doubt  remains — 
he  may  rejoice  evermore." 

Now  from  the  above  it  is  clear,  that  the 
Campbellite  is  taught  to  view  his  baptism  as 
evidence  of  his  regeneration  and  pardon ;  a  doc- 
trine wholly  unknown  to  the  New  Testament, 
and  as  dangerous  as  it  is  unscriptural.^  It  is  true, 
the  Scriptures  teach  that  the  christian  need  not 
walk  in  darkness,  or  remain  destitute  of  a 
knowledge  of  sins  forgiven ;  but  their  method 
of  obtaining  this  knowledge,  and  their  revela- 
tions of  its  nature,  are  as  far  removed  from  the 
teachings  of  A.  Campbell,  as  light  from  dark- 
ness. For  while  he  would  predicate  this  know- 
ledge upon  the  evidence  of  our  baptism,  the 
Scriptures  refer  it  to  the  witness  of  the  Spirit, 
"  sent  forth  into  our  hearts  crving,  Abba,  Fa- 
ther." 

But  here  we  touch  a  key  whose  sound  is  pro- 
bably as  grating  to  the  feelings  of  our  oppo- 
nents as  the  most  horrid  jargon  to  the  refined 
and  sensitive  musician ;  for  though  Mr.  Camp- 
bell admits  that  the  christian  must  possess  "  the 
spirit  of  Christ,"  it  is  much  doubted  whether 
he  or  his  followers  believe  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
have  any  such  influence  upon  the  souls  of  men 
as  christians  consider  the  Bible  to  teach.     In 


100  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

the  Campbeilite  vocabulary,  the  Spmt,  as  con- 
cerned in  our  salvation,  means  either  the  writ- 
ten Word,  or  a  disposition  of  mind  consistent 
with  the  christian  profession.  From  the  earli- 
est dawnings  of  this  yiew  gospel,  its  propagators 
have  manifested  a  disposition  to  play  off  their 
irony  and  ridicule  against  the  idea  of  the  love 
of  God  being  shed  abroad  in  the  heart  "by  the 
Holy  Ghost  which  is  given  unto  us."  One  of 
their  most  popular  leaders  in  this  state,  was 
formerly  in  the  habit,  in  his  public  harangues, 
of  classing  this  doctrine  v/ith  the  ghost  and  witch 
stories  of  a  credulous  and  superstitious  age,  and 
of  inquiring  with  a  satirical  sneer,  of  those  who 
profess  to  have  received  the  Holy  Spirit,  "  How 
did  you  get  it  ?  Where  did  it  enter  into  you  ? 
At  the  head,  or  the  feet,  or  under  tiic  fifth  rib, 
or  where  V  Another  of  the  same  school,  and 
in  the  same  strain,  has  been  heard  to  ask, 
"  Granting  that  you  are  possessed  of  a  Spirit, 
iiow  do  you  know  but  that  it  is  the  spirit  of  the 
devil  ?"  And  others  with  equal  recklessness 
of  consequences  and  disregard  of  the  teachings 
of  Scripture,  have  said,  "  While  the  orthodox 
talk  of  having  the  Spirit  in  their  hearts,  we  are 
content  to  carry  it  in  our  pockets.''^ 

That  the  above,  or  similar  irreverent  and 
blasphemous  expressions,  have  been  used  by 
the  popular  teachers  of  Campbellisra,  is  sus- 
ceptible of  abundant  proof;  and  though  Mr. 
Campbell  may  never  have  used  them,  they  arc 
certainly  the  natural  consequences  of  his  sys- 
tem.    The  positions  assumed  in  his  system, 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  101 

and  some  of  the  arguments  advanced  for  its  sup- 
port, are  so  much  like  those  resorted  to  by  the 
opposers  of  revealed  religion,  that  the  utmost 
we  can  expect  as  a  general  result,  of  those  who 
embrace  it  is,  that  they  have  a  "  form  of  godli- 
ness," while  they  deny  "  the  power." 

The  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  the 
heart,  is  one  of  the  doctrines  of  Christianity 
against  which  deism,  under  the  names  of  natu- 
ral and  rational  religion,  has  urged  its  niost 
strenuous  objections;  and  the  teachings  of  Mr. 
Campbell  and  his  followers,  on  this  subject,  are 
well  calculated  to  keep  these  objections  in 
countenance.  In  addition  to  the  assumption, 
stated  formerly,  that  man  does  not  need  the  as- 
sistance of  the  Spirit,  to  induce,  or  to  enable 
him  to  turn  to  God,  Campbellism  tells  us,  that 
such  an  influence  is  impossible  ;  that  we  can 
receive  no  ideas  or  impressions  except  through 
the  medium  of  the  senses  ;  and  as  the  eye  can- 
not see  nor  the  ear  hear  the  influence  which  the 
Spirit  is  said  to  exercise,  it  is,  therefore,  argued 
that  the  idea  of  such  an  intercourse  is  only  a 
whim  of  the  imagination.  It  is  true,  this  ar- 
gument is  adduced  to  oppose  the  doctrine  that 
.sinners  are  aided  and  excited  by  the  Spirit,  to 
repent  and  believe  the  gospel ;  but  it  is  equally 
opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  the  witness  of  the 
Spirit  with  the  spirit  of  the  believer,  and,  also, 
as  Mr.  Waterman  has  shown,  to  the  fact  of  the 
miraculous  gift  of  tongues  on  the  day  of  Pente- 
cost. Indeed,  to  admit  the  above  argument, 
and  carry  it  out  to  its  legitimate  results,  would 
I  2 


102  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

be  to  reduce  Christianity  to  a  mere  system  of 
ethics,  differing  but  little  from  the  moral  codes 
of  heathen  philosophy,  except  in  its  external 
rites  and  ceremonies. 

But  we  do  not  admit  it.  It  is  assertion,  and 
not  proof.  It  never  has  been  proved,  nor  can 
it  ever  be,  that  there  is  any  thing  impossible  in 
the  intercourse  of  the  Spirit  of  God  with  the 
spirits  of  men.  Cannot  that  Being  who  made 
us,  who  is  himself  a  pure  spirit,  have  immedi- 
ate access  to  our  spirits,  so  as  to  influence  our 
thoughts,  affections,  and  wills,  without  either 
words  or  signs  ?  To  admit  the  possibility  of 
this,  is  certainly  far  more  reasonable,  than  to 
deny  it.  Before  such  an  influence  can  be  proved 
to  be  impossible,  the  objector  must  thoroughly 
understand  the  laws  of  perception,  memory^ 
and  association,  which  is  more,  we  believe, 
than  any  philosopher,  however  deep  his  re- 
searches into  the  causes  of  the  phenomena  of 
mind,  ever  pretended  to  know.  It  is  readily 
admitted  that  when  men  suggest  thoughts,  or 
influence  the  minds  of  other  men,  they  must 
do  it  through  the  medim  of  words  or  signs.  But 
to  suppose  these  the  only  means  by  which  this 
can  be  effected,  is  to  found  an  objection  wholly 
upon  our  ignorance.  To  argue,  because  we 
cannot  do  this,  that,  therefore,  God  cannot,  and 
to  deny  with  the  Campbellite  the  possibility  of 
this  divine  intercourse  and  influence  with  our 
spirits  and  upon  our  hearts,  is  to  reduce  the 
Almighty  down  to  our  finite  minds  and  limited 
understandings ;   to   imagine  him  "  altogether 


CAMPBELLI3M    EXPOSED.  103 

such  a  one  as  ourselves;"  and  to  reject  some 
of  the  most  positive  declarations  and  comforting 
promises  of  the  gospel. 

Some  remarks  were  introduced  in  the  last 
paragraph  to  show  that  an  intercourse  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  vv'ith  our  spirits,  is  not  impossible. 
But  why  contend  for  the  possibility  of  that  which 
is  clearly  taught  in  that  book,  which  our  op- 
ponents profess  to  receive  as  the  Word  of  God  ? 
In  the  Scriptures,  which  form  the  only  sufficient 
rule  both  of  our  faith  and  practice,  and  become 
the  arbiter  in  all  controversies  involving  chris- 
tian principles,  the  whole  work  of  salvation  in 
the  soul  is  represented  as  being  wrought  by  the 
Holy  Spirit.  We  understand  the  Bible  in  this 
light,  and  believe  that  common  sense  and  fair 
criticism  can  view  it  in  no  other.  Few  things 
seem  more  plainly  taught  in  the  Scriptures,  than 
the  doctrine  of  the  operations  of  the  Spirit,  in 
convincing  the  sinner  of  sin,  and  in  comforting 
the  believer. 

Before  the  flood,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  represent- 
ed as  striving  with  the  antediluvians,  to  bring 
them  to  repentance,  of  whom  the  Almighty  de- 
clared, "  My  Spirit  shall  not  always  strive  with 
man."  To  sustain  his  system,  Mr.  Campbell 
tells  us  that  the  "  Spirit,"  here,  only  means 
the  preaching  of  Noah.  But  this,  again,  is  as- 
sertion without  proof.  God  says  it  was  his 
Spirit ;  Mr.  Campbell  says,  it  was  Noah's 
preaching.  The  reader  will  be  at  no  loss  which 
to  believe. 

Under  the  law  the  wicked  are  said  to  "grieve,'* 


104  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

and  to  "  resist  the  Holy  Ghost,"  which  certain- 
ly implies  that  it  then  strove  with  them.  Here 
we  are  again  told,  that  to  resist  the  Spirit  means 
only  to  resist  the  JVord.  But  once  for  all,  we 
remark,  that  this  assertion  in  the  absence  of  all 
proof,  and  contrary  to  the  plain  letter  of  Scrip- 
ture, comes  witli  very  ill  grace  from  those  who 
so  frequently  tell  us,  that  "  the  Scriptures  mean 
what  they  say." 

In  reference  to  the  gospel  dispensation,  we 
are  taught  in  the  New  Testament,  that  the 
work  of  the  Spirit  is  to  reprove  the  sinner  and 
bring  him  back  to  God,  as  well  as  to  comfort 
and  sustain  the  christian.  That  the  Spirit  con- 
vinces of  sin,  is  obvious  from  numerous  pas- 
sages and  arguments  in  the  discourses  of  our 
Lord,  and  in  the  writings  of  the  apostles.  Be- 
fore his  crucifixion,  the  Savior  promised  to  send 
"  the  Comforter,  even  the  Spirit  of  truth,"  to 
abide  with  his  followers  for  ever,  and  to  "  re- 
prove the  world  of  sin."  On  this  passage  we 
observe,  1st.  This  cannot  mean  the  Spirit  in 
its  miraculous  gifts,  for  that  was  given  for  a 
time  only,  but  the  Spirit  here  promised  is  to 
*' abide  for  ever;"  and,  2nd.  The  work  and 
influences  of  the  Spirit  as  here  pointed  out,  can- 
not be  restricted  to  the  christian,  because  a  part 
of  that  work  is  to  "  reprove  the  world  of  sin, 
because  they  believe  not;"  and  as  "he  that  be- 
lieveth  not  is  condemned  already,"  consequent- 
ly the  person  thus  reproved  is  no  christian.  It 
is  true  that  the  Savior  declared  the  world  could 
not  receive  the  Comforter,  and  this  is  urged  by 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  105 

Campbellites  in  proof  of  their  notion  that  the 
Spirit  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  sinner.  But 
the  effort  is  certainly  a  failure.  We  readily 
concede,  that  a  worldly  minded  sinner  cannot 
receive  the  Spirit  as  a  comforter,  for  it  is  "  be- 
cause ye  are  sons"  that  "  God  hath  sent  forth 
the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your  hearts,  crying, 
Abba,  Father  ;"  but  this  by  no  means  proves  that 
the  sinner  cannot  be  reproved  by  the  Spirit. 
Indeed,  one  of  his  offices,  developed  in  the  text 
before  us,  is  to  "  reprove  the  world  of  sin."  In 
doing  which  he  must  operate  upon  the  hearts 
of  sinners ;  and  when  they  open  the  door  and 
let  him  in,  they  being  no  longer  of  "  the  world," 
receive  him  as  a  comforter. 

We  are  wandering  from  our  main  object  by 
enlarging  upon  a  point  v/hich  we  intended  bare- 
ly to  touch,  but  having  engaged  in  it  we  shall 
take  the  liberty  to  introduce  another  argument. 
The  Savior  is  represented  in  Scripture,  as  "  the 
Sun  of  Righteousness,"  the  illuminator  of  man. 
This  may  be  said,  chiefly  with  reference  to  the 
gospel  as  published  to  the  Vv^orld ;  but  the  idea 
is  sometimes  used  in  a  sense  so  comprehensive, 
thaLwe  must  travel  beyond  the  circulation  of 
the  gospel. to  find  its  application.  St.  John 
speaks  of  Christ  as  "the  true  light,  which 
ligkteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world." 
Now,  a  large  portion  that  come  "into  the  world" 
are  not  only  sinners,  but  pagans  and  barbarians, 
destitute  of  the  knov/ledge  contained  in  the 
written  Word;  but  still  Christ  "lighteththem," 
which  he  must  do  by  his  Spirit,  convincing 
5* 


108  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

them  of  sin,  and  giving  them  some  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil.  Under  whatever  restrictions 
and  limitations  the  phrase  "  all  men"  may  at 
times  be  used,  they  cannot,  according  to  the 
genius  of  language,  apply  to  the  phrase  before 
us,  "  every  man."  By  saying  every  man  in 
Kentucky,  we  necessarily  include  the  whole  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  state ;  and  so  "  every 
man  that  cometh  into  the  world"  must  mean 
all,  without  exception,  that  ever  did,  or  ever 
will  inhabit  the  world.  Hence,  in  order  to  find 
one  man  who  is  and  ever  has  been  destitute  of 
the  reproofs  and  strivings  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ, 
we  must  go  to  some  other  planet.  He  never 
came  into  the  world,  and  consequently,  cannot 
be  found  among  the  children  of  men  on  the 
earth. 

Having  now  seen  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
operation  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  heart  of  the 
sinner,  is  authenticated  by  the  Word  of  infal- 
lible inspiration,  we  resume  the  consideration 
of  the  believer's  evidence,  that  he  is  freed  from 
*'  condemnation." 

That  it  is  the  privilege  of  the  child  of  God 
to  have  an  assurance  of  his  favor,  sufficient  to 
impart  substantial  comfort,  few  christians  will 
deny.  If  then,  being  "by  nature  children  of 
wrath,"  it  is  possible  for  us  to  become  "  new 
creatures,"  and  to  enjoy  satisfactory  evidence 
that  "  we  have  passed  from  death  unto  life," 
it  deeply  concerns  us  to  know  what  that  evi- 
dence is,  and  upon  what  it  is  predicated.  And 
having  seen  that  the  Campbellite's  evidence, 


GAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  107 

immersion,  will  not  suffice,  even  to  hang  a  hope 
upon,  we  turn  to  the  New  Testament,  and  ex- 
amine the  case  by  the  principles  we  may  there 
find. 

In  addition  to  the  Savior's  promise  of  "  the 
Comforter"  to  abide  with  his  followers,  the 
New  Testament  informs  us  that  God  *'  dwells 
in  them,"  that  they  are  "  born  of  the  Spirit," 
"ledby  the  Spirit,"  "justified  and  sanctified  by 
the  Spirit,"  and  "  sealed"  by  the  same  Spirit, 
"unto  the  day  of  redemption."  If  then,  the 
situation  of  the  christian  be  such  as  to  warrant 
the  application  of  the  above  phrases  to  him,  it 
is  certainly  reasonable  to  suppose  that  he  does 
not  remain  ignorant  of  the  fact,  that  he  has 
passed  "  from  darkness  to  light ;"  and  what  we 
here  suppose  reasonable,  is  abundantly  estab- 
lished by  Scripture  testimony.  "  There  is  now 
no  condemnation  to  them  that  are  in  Christ 
Jesus."  "  Examine  yourselves,  whether  ye  be 
in  the  faith."  "  If  we  say  v/e  have  fellowship 
with  him,  and  walk  in  darkness,  we  lie,  and  do 
not  the  truth."  "  He  that  belie veth  on  the  Son 
of  God  hath  the  witness  in  himself."  So  says 
the  Book.  And  when  we  inquire,  what  is  the 
"  witness"  which  the  believer  has  "  in  him- 
self?" the  same  volume  furnishes  a  definite 
answer.  "  As  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit 
of  God,  they  are  the  sons  of  God.  For  ye 
have  not  received  the  spirit  of  bondage  again 
to  fear,  but  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we 
cry  Abba,  Father.  The  Spirit  itself  beareth 
witness  with  our  spirit,  that  we  are  the  child- 


108  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

ren  of  God."  Rom.  viii,  14,  16.  In  this  pas- 
sage it  is  clear,  that,  "  the  Spirit  of  God,"  men- 
tioned in  the  14th  verse,  and  "  the  Spirit" 
which  *'beareth  witness,"  in  the  16th,  are  the 
same  ;  consequently,  "  the  witness"  which  the 
believer  has  "  in  himself,"  is  "  the  Spirit  of 
God." 

If  there  remain  a  doubt  relative  to  the  cor- 
rectness of  this  conclusion,  the  qualifying  term 
"zY.se//*,"  seems  sufficient  to  remove  it.  "  The 
Spirit  ITSELF  beareth  witness  with  our  spirit." 
This  language  is  so  emphatic  and  unequivocal, 
that  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  anything  more 
clear  and  definite.  Suppose  the  apostle  had 
said,  "  The  water  of  baptism  itself  bears  wit- 
ness of  our  son-ship."  Would  any  Campbel- 
lite  doubt  his  meaning  ?  No.  The  text  would 
then  be  urged,  and  very  properly  too,  as  proof 
decisive,  in  his  favor.  But  as  it  stands,  it  is 
equally  decisive  against  him.  The  Holy  Ghost 
himself,  and  neither  our  baptism  nor  our  pray- 
ers, is  declared  to  witness  our  adoption.  How 
the  honest,  intelligent  Campbellite,  with  this, 
and  numerous  corroborating  passages  before 
him,  can  sneer  at  this  kind  of  evidence,  and  as- 
sert that  he  has  in  his  baptism  an  evidence  of 
his  pardon  that  would  be  taken  in  any  court  of 
justice,  forms  a  problem  we  are  not  able  to 
solve. 

The  view  we  have  taken  of  the  above  pas- 
sages, in  connection  with  the  spirit  and  letter 
of  other  parts  of  the  Sacred  Volume,  has  been 
received  by  most  divines  of  eminence,   fronii 


CA5IPBELL1SM  EXPOSED.  lOd 

Luther  and  Calvin,  down  to  John  Wesley,  and 
to  the  pres-ent  day.  Indeed  we  cannot  see  how 
any  man  with  proper  views  of  the  Scriptures, 
of  protestantism,  and  of  experimental  and  prac- 
tical religion,  can  question  the  doctrine  of  as- 
surance, by  the  witness  of  the  Spirit.  We  are 
aware,  hov/ever,  that  some  difference  of  opin- 
ion has  obtained  among  evangelical  divines,  re- 
lative to  the  method  of  arriving  at  this  assur- 
ance ;  some  having  concluded  that  we  obtain  it 
by  inference,  others,  by  the  direct  testimony 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  mind.  But  this  dif- 
ference exists  in  appearance,  more  than  in  real- 
ity ;  neither  of  the  opinions  militates  against 
the  doctrine  itself,  and  when  carried  out,  they 
result  substantially,  in  the  same  conclusion. 
Those  who  contend  for  the  direct  testimony 
of  the  Spirit,  include  the  corroborating  evidence 
of  itiference  ;  and  those  who  plead  for  the  in- 
ferential  testimony,  reasoning  from  effect  to 
cause,  cannot  but  admit  the  direct  witness  of 
the  Spirit.  None  of  the  divines  of  this  latter 
class^  conceive  a  bare  reformation  of  conduct  to 
be  sufficient  ground  for  the  inference  that  we 
are  justified  ;  they  all  contend  for  a  change  of 
heart,  concomitant  wdth  justification,  for  a  re- 
newal of  mind,  and  the  existence  of  the  hallow- 
ed affections  of  love,  peace  and  joy  ^  and  that 
this  change,  in  all  its  parts,  is  eifected  by  the 
direct  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  We  there- 
fore conclude,  that  so  far  as  our  present  inquiry 
is  concerned,  there  is  no  essential  difference 
between  the  two  opinions ;  each  involves  th$ 
K 


1 10  CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED. 

witness  of  the  Spirit ;  and  hence  we  repeat,  that 
the  leading  divines  of  the  reformed  churches, 
have  ever  considered  the  Scriptures  as  teaching, 
that  the  believer  is  assured  by  the  Spirit  of  God, 
of  his  adoption.  And  shall  we  reject  the  con- 
curring opinions  of  so  many  great  and  good  men 
of  different  ages  and  sects,  founded  upon  the 
principles  and  declarations  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, for  the  ijise  dixit  of  the  self-styled  Re- 
former of  Bethany  ?  Shall  we  at  his  command, 
surrender  the  witness  of  the  Spirit,  as  taught 
in  the  Scriptures,  for  the  soul-destroying,  papal 
notion  of  baptismal  regeneration  and  adoption  ? 
God  forbid. 

The  believer's  evidence  of  his  pardon  is  still 
before  us.  The  conclusion  at  which  we  arrived, 
though  evidently  taught  by  the  letter  of  the  tes- 
timony of  God,  and  commonly  received  among 
christians,  is  rejected  by  the  Campbellite,  upon 
the  ground,  that  to  expect  a  knowledge  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  by  the  witness  of  the  Spirit, 
subjects  us  to  the  charge  of  mysticism  and  en- 
thusiasm.  If  by  this  we  are  to  understand  that 
the  mode  of  operation  by  which  the  Divine 
Spirit  communicates  this  knowledge  to  our 
spirits,  is  mysterious  and  incomprehensible,  we 
plead  guilty,  and  take  shelter  behind  the  Savior, 
who,  in  his  conversation  with  Nicodemus,  il- 
lustrated this  subject,  by  alluding  to  the  myste- 
rious operation  of  the  wind ;  but  if  this  is  in- 
tended to  brand  us  with  trusting  to  feelings  and 
impressions,  unauthorised  by  the  Word  of  God, 
or  with  relying  upon  an  evidence  that,  from  its 


CAMPBELLISM  EXPOSED.  Ill 

mysterious  nature,  is  uncertain  and  unsatisfac- 
tory to  him  who  has  it,  we  deny  the  charge,  and 
stand  prepared  to  detect  its  fallacy. 

"  But  how  do  you  know,"  says  the  Camp- 
bellite,  *'  that  the  Spirit  which  persuades  you 
that  you  are  a  child  of  God,  is  not  the  spirit  of 
the  devil  ?"     To  this  question,  Mr.  Wesley  has 
furnished  an  appropriate  answer.     "  Even  by 
the  testimony  of  my  own  spirit,  '  by  the  answer 
of  a  good  conscience  toward  God.'     Hereby 
you  may  know  that  you  are  in  no  delusion,  that 
you  have  not  deceived  your  own  soul.     The 
immediate  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  ruling  in  the 
heart,  are  love,  joy,  peace,  bowels  of  mercies, 
humbleness   of   mind,    meekness,    gentleness, 
long-suffering.     And  the  outward  fruits  are,  the 
doing  good  to  all  men,  and  a  uniform  obedience 
to  all  the  commands  of  God."     Thus,  the  cor- 
roborating testimony  of  our  own  spirit,  with 
which  the  Spirit  of  God  bears  witness,  proves 
that  the  Spirit  which  assures  us  of  our  adoption, 
is  the  "good  Spirit,"  for  he  alone  can  fill  the 
heart  with  love  to  God^  peace  in  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  mid  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  hence, 
we  have  two  witnesses  to  the  sam.e  fact,  produ- 
cing a  consciousness  of  pardon,  which,  to  the  in- 
dividual himself,  is  the  strongest  kind  of  evidence. 
"But  in  this,"  continues  the  objector,  "you 
make  your  feelings  the  evidence  of  your  pardon  ; 
and    they  are   too   fluctuating,  and  under  the 
influence  of  too  many  external  circumstances, 
to  be  a  safe  criterion."     It  is  admitted,  that  we 
do,  in  part,  resort  to  our  feelings  to  determine 


112  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

this  matter ;  and  we  expect  to  do  so  as  long  as 
we  can  find  such  respectable  authority  as  the 
infallible  oracles  of  God  to  justify  us.     No  man 
on  Scriptural  principles,  nor  even  the   Camp- 
belUte  on  his  ov/n  unscriptural  principles,  can 
persuade  himself  of  the  remission  of  his  sins, 
without  recourse  to  his  feelings  ;  for  after  all  his 
parade  about  immersion,  as  being  evidence  of 
pardon,  that  would  be  received  by  any  judge  or 
jury,  he  does  not  pretend  that  it  will  be  of  any 
avail,  unless  received  in  faith.     But  how  does 
he  know  that  he  has  faith,  but  by  his  feelings, 
his  consciousness  ?  It  is  thus  seen,  that  a  resort 
to  our  feelings  is  unavoidable,  even  on  Mr. 
Campbell's  scheme.  Still  he  professes  to  discard 
this  kind  of  evidence,  and  hfs  followers  are  ever 
ready  to  make  themselves  merry  at  the  expense 
of  those  who  receive  it ;  we  therefore  repeat, 
that  no  man  can  have  an  assurance  that  God  has 
pardoned  him,  without  appealing  to  his  feelings. 
If  the  Scriptures  do  not  bring  us  to  this  conclu- 
sion, and  warrant  such  an  appeal,  they  teach 
nothing,  they  prove  nothing.     "We  know,'* 
Bays  St.  John,  "  that  we  have  passed  from  death 
unto  life,  because  we  love  the  brethren."     Can 
love  exist  where  there  is  no  feeling  ?     Are  not 
our  feelings  the  only  means  by  which  we  become 
conscious  of  its  existence  ?  Again,  St.  Paul  says, 
that  *'  the  kingdom  of  God  is  righteousness,  and 
peace,  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost."     Can  the  - 
"peace  of  God"  abide  in  us,  and  we  remain 
imconscious  of  it?    Can  we  have  "joy  in  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  and  be  destitute  of  feeling  ?  Cer- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  113 

tainly  not.  Joy  cannot  exist  in  the  absence  of 
feeling.  And  as  the  kingdom  of  God  consists 
of  "  peace  and  joy,"  it  follows  that  the  religion 
of  Christ  manifests  itself  to  our  feelings  ;  and 
hence,  if  our  opponents  have  discovered  a  reli- 
gion, or  a  kingdom,  from  which  these  holy  af- 
fections are  excluded,  it  is  a  misnomer  to  call 
it  the  religion  of  the  Bible,  or  the  kingdom  of 
God.  They  may,  as  suits  their  fancy,  call  it 
the  religion  of  A.  Campbell,  or  the  kingdom  of 
water,  and  locate  it  on  some  island  ;  we  shall 
neither  give  it  a  "local  habitation  nor  a  name," 
but  rest  contentwith  entreating  them  not  to  insult 
the  Majesty  of  heaven,  so  far  as  to  call  a  thing  by 
his  name,  which  is  directly  opposed  to  his  Word. 
It  is  admitted  that  our  feelings  could  not  be 
relied  upon  in  determining  this  matter,  if  we 
had  no  authority  to  appeal  to  them,  and  no 
standard  to  try  them  by.  But  the  Scriptures 
furnish  both  the  authority  and  the  standard. 
The  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  mentioned  by  the 
apostle,  are,  "  love,  joy,  peace,  gentleness,  good- 
ness, meekness,  faith,  temperance."  Among 
the  fruits  here  enumerated,  we  find  affections, 
as  well  as  principles  and  morals  ;  love,  joy  and 
peace,  as  well  as  gentleyiess,  goodness,  and 
temperance.  And  while  the  latter  are  mani- 
fested to  others  in  our  conduct,  the  former  are 
made  known  to  ourselves  in  our  feelings.  To 
be  more  definite.  The  question  at  issue  is, 
**  Am  I  a  child  of  God  ?"  The  Scriptures  pro- 
nounce, "  as  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of 
God,"  to  be  "  the  sons  of  God."  My  next  in- 
k2 


114  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

quiry  then  is,  "  Have  I  the  Spirit  of  God  ?" 
To  determine  this,  I  examine  for  the  "fiiiits  of 
the  Spirit,"  as  pointed  out  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  find  among  them,  "  love,  joy,  and  peace." 
My  next  object,  is,  to  determine  whether  I  have 
these  affections  ;  and  in  order  to  this,  I  must 
have  recourse  to  my  feelings  ;  for  by  them  alone 
can  I  decide.  They  tell  me  that  I  "love  the 
brethren,"  have  "  peace  with  God,"  and  possess 
"joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost;"  and  the  Bible  tells 
me  that  this  love,  peace,  and  joy,  are  the  fruits 
of  the  Spirit's  agency,  as  the  Comforter,  the 
Spirit  of  adoption,  and  that  they  spring  alone 
from  that  source.  Thus  it  is  clear,  that  irre- 
spective of  my  feelings,  I  can  have  no  knowl- 
edge of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  ;  and  that  they, 
when  brought  to  the  standard  of  Scripture,  fur- 
nish the  most  conclusive  evidence,  that  the 
Spirit  which  bears  witness  with  my  spirit,  is 
the  "  Spirit  of  God."  Any  evidence  short  of 
this,  whether  predicated  upon  immersion  or 
confession,  the  Scriptures  do  not  sanction. 
That  peace  of  which  we  are  insensible,  cannot 
be  possessed ;  love  and  joy  unknown  to  our 
feelings,  can  have  no  existence. 

And  yet  every  Campbellite  is  taught  not  only 
to  reject,  but  to  ridicule  the  idea  of  a  feeling 
sense  of  the  pardoning  love  of  God  by  the  luit- 
ness  of  the  Spirit.  It  is  one  of  their  most 
popular  topics,  one  on  which  they  seem  to  dvreil 
with  great  delight.  In  ridiculing  those  who 
rely  on  this  kind  of  evidence,  and  in  setting 
forth   the  excellency  of  their  immersion  evi- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED  115 

dence,  some  of  their  leaders  have  reiterated  the 
following  strains,  till  they  have  grown  familiar  to 
most  of  their  hearers.  "  He  who  relies  on  his 
baptism  as  evidence,  can  never  doubt ;  his  par- 
don is  as  sure  as  the  truth  of  God.  But  how 
different  the  situation  of  the  bewildered  enthu- 
siast, who  talks  about  his  feelings  ?  He  is  like 
a  criminal  under  sentence  of  death,  chained  and 
imprisoned,  who  concludes  himself  at  liberty, 
and  free  from  danger,  because  his  feelings  tell 
him  so.  But  what  good  will  his  feelings  do 
him?  They  will  neither  retard  the  day  of  death, 
nor  procure  him  a  reprieve.  And  just  so  with 
the  unimmersed.  He  may  imagine  himself 
pardoned  ;  his  feelings  may  tell  him  he  is  safe  ; 
but  it  is  all  delusion."  Upon  this  choice  mor- 
sel of  Campbellite  preaching,  we  observe,  1 .  The 
illustration  is  inadmissible,  because  it  supposes 
a  case  tliat  can  never  happen.  No  man  of  sound 
mind  could  feel  himself  free  and  safe,  while  in 
prison  under  sentence  of  death ;  and,  2.  The 
case  to  which  the  illustration  is  applied,  is  not 
fairly  stated.  He  who  has  the  witness  of  the 
Spirit  does  not  imagine  himself  pardoned ;  he 
is  assured  of  it  by  the  only  evidence  which  the 
Scriptures  have  authorized  him  to  receive.  As 
"it  is  God  that  justiHeth,"  the  justification  of 
the  sinner  is  at  first  known  only  to  God ;  but 
in  mercy  to  the  troubled  soul,  he  sends  the 
Spirit  into  his  heart,  communicating  feelings  of 
"  love,  and  joy,  and  peace,"  and  thus  assuring 
him  that  God  is  reconciled.  This  may  be  fur- 
ther  illustrated.     You    are    angry   with  your 


116  CAMPBELLISM  ^EXPOSED. 

neighbor ;  you  know  it  by  your  feelings.  Ex- 
planation follows,  and  your  anger  subsides ; 
you  are  immediately  conscious  of  it,  your  feel- 
ings testify  that  your  anger  is  gone.  Apply 
this  to  the  case  before  us.  Convinced  by  tha 
Word  and  Spirit  of  God,  the  sinner  feels  the 
enmity  and  wickedness  of  his  heart,  becomes 
conscious  of  his  danger,  and  flies  by  repentance 
and  faith,  pleading  the  merits  of  the  Savior, 
that  he  may  obtain  forgiveness.  He  believes 
with  all  his  heart,  and  his  pardon  is  sealed. 
Jesus  speaks,  "Son,  thy  sins  are  forgiven," 
and  sends  the  Spirit  to  communicate  the  joyful 
intelligence  to  the  spirit  of  the  penitent ;  and  the 
consequence  is,  he  becomes  conscious  that 
"  old  things  have  passed  away,  and  all  things 
become  new." 

Nor  does  this  evidence,  from  its  nature,  leave 
him  in  doubt  or  uncertainty.  It  is,  indeed,  the 
most  satisfactory  evidence  we  can  have  on  such 
a  subject.  The  nature  of  the  subject  does  not 
admit  of  mathematical  demonstration,  but  it  ad- 
mits of  proof  equally  satisfactory  to  our  own 
minds,  and  this  we  have  in  the  consciousness 
produced  by  the  witness  of  the  Spirit.  The 
strongest  evidence  we  can  have  of  a  diseased 
body,  is  a  consciousness  of  pain  ;  and  the  most 
conclusive  testimony  we  can  have  of  our  fellow- 
ship with  God,  is  that  consciousness  of  tlie  fact, 
which  results  from  the  witness  of  the  Spirit, 
upon  comparing  our  feelings  and  experience 
with  the  standard  of  Scripture.  And  this  wit- 
ness, though  denounced  by  the  Campbellite  as 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  117 

being  metaphysical  and  nonsensical,  is  in  its 
nature  so  simple  and  plain,   that    the  "  way- 
faring man,  though  a  fool,  need  not  err."     He 
who   has   it  may  be  ignorant  of  the  laws  and 
operations  of  mind,  and  not  able  to  reason  logi- 
cally or  philosophically  upon  any  subject,  con- 
sequently, sophistry  may  silence   him,  but  it 
will  never  be  able  to  shake  his  faith,  while  con- 
scious of  the  indwelling  of  the   Holy  Spirit. 
While  the  formalist  endeavors  to  "hope  against 
hope,"  that  he  has  "a  hope,"  and  the  Camp- 
bellite  vainly  strives  to   predicate  an  assurance 
of  pardon  upon  his  baptism,  the  man  who  pos- 
sesses the  witness  of  the  Spirit  has  an  evidence 
entirely    satisfactory,    and    one   which   comes 
within  the  grasp  of  the  most  ordinary  capacity. 
Not  long  since,  a  native  African,  whose  hu- 
mility and   piety  are    proverbial  where  he  is 
known,  observed  to   a  minister,  that  he  was 
baptized  in  Africa,  and  that  he  loved  God  in 
Africa.     The  minister  inquired,  "how  do  you 
know  you  love  God  ?     Do  you  infer  this  from 
your  baptism  ?     The  reply  was,  "  O  no  !  Me 
know  me  love  God.     Me  feel  me  love  God." 
We  do  not  mention  this  to  prove  the  truth  of 
our  doctrine,  but  to  illustrate  the  nature  and 
character    of  that   evidence,  which    God   has 
given  to   establish  our    adoption,   and    impart 
substantial  peace  and  comfort  to  the  mind ;  an 
evidence  so  simple,  and  yet  so  comprehensive, 
that  while  it  meets  the  case  of  the    ignorant 
savage,  it  is  equally  adapted  to  the  soaring  in- 
tellect of  a  Newton,  a  Locke,  or  a  Bacon. 


118  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

From  the  whole,  we  feel  satisfied  with  the 
doctrine  of  assurance,  as  taught  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  received  by  the  great  and  good  of  past  ages, 
and  the  present  day  ;  and  if,  for  this,  we  con- 
tinue to  be  charged  with  fanaticism  and  enthu- 
siasm, we  are  in  too  much  good  company  to  be 
put  out  of  countenance.  The  witness  of  the 
Spirit  M'ith  our  own  spirit,  forms  the  only  tri- 
])unal  established  in  the  Scriptures  to  assure  us 
of  pardon.  They  have  never  authorized  us  to 
infer  this,  by  referring  to  the  time  and  place  of 
our  baptism  ;  but  their  language  is,  "  If  any  man 
have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  he  is  none  of  his." 
"  As  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  are 
the  sons  of  God."  "  Because  ye  are  sons,  God 
hath  sent  forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your 
hearts,  crying,  Abba,  Father."  "  The  Spirit 
itself  beareth  witness  with  our  spirit  that  we  are 
the  children  of  God."  "He  that  believeth  on 
the  Son  of  God,  hath  the  witness  in  himself." 
This  host  of  testimony  will  surely  be  sufficient 
for  the  candid,  unbiased  reader.  Let  him  who 
rejects  it,  take  care  lest  he  wrest  the  Scriptures 
to  his  oAvn  destruction. 

In  taking  leave  of  the  present  topic,  we 
would  say,  that  fairness  and  candor  with  our 
opponents,  have  been  our  aim,  so  that  we  are 
not  conscious  of  having  written  one  sentence, 
"  v/hich  dying,  we  would  wish  to  blot."  In 
stating  their  views,  recourse  has  been  had  to 
the  writings  of  Mr.  Campbell,  and  to  the  teach- 
ings and  practice  of  the  accredited  leaders  of  his 
party ;  from  which  we  karn  that  they  consider 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  119 

immersion  the  "  one  thing  needful,"  the  means 
of  obtaining  pardon,  and  the  evidence  of  pardon. 
From  this  caricature  of  Christianity,  our  feelings 
and  judgments  revolt.  Observation  upon  its 
practical  effects,  long  ago,  convinced  us,  that  it 
is  deleterious  to  the  existence  of  personal  piety, 
and  practical  godliness,  engendering  strife,  and 
pride,  and  vain  glory.  If  so,  it  is  destructive  of 
souls,  and  every  good  man  ought  to  oppose  it. 
A  religion  that  "  plays  round  the  head,  but 
comes  not  to  the  heart,"  an  experience  that 
begins  in  the  water,  and  ends  by  coming  out  of 
it,  may  answer  while  we  are  in  health,  but  will 
fail  in  the  hour  of  death.  If  they  would  baptize 
the  penitent  "for  remission  of  sins,"  and  then 
tell  him  to  "  ask,"  "  seek,"  and  "strive,"  till  he 
obtains  the  witness  of  the  Spirit,  all  would  be 
well.  But  no,  this  would  be  too  humiliating  to 
the  pride  of  man.  An  easier  plan,  one  that  wilt 
take  with  those  who  will  not  submit  to  so  much 
humility  and  self-denial,  must  be  substituted. 
And  hence,  seeking  is  pronounced  unscriptural ; 
praying  for  remission  of  sins,  and  for  the  Holy 
Spirit,  is  made  a  theme  for  mirth  ;  and  striving 
"  to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate,"  (especially  in 
coming  to  the  mourner's  seat,)  is  almost  as  bad 
as  pagan  idolatry ;  and  immersion  is  made  the 
sine  qua  non,  the  indispensable  every  thing. 
The  result  of  which  is,  that  in  the  minds  of 
many,  the  blood  of  the  Redeemer,  the  witness 
and  operations  of  the  Spirit,  the  duty  of  prayer, 
and  holiness  of  heart  and  life,  are  virtually 
washed  away  in  the  water. 


120  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

CHAPTER  IV. 

MODE  OF  BAPTISM. 

Import  of  the  Greek  word  Baptizo — import  of  the 
phrases  In  Jordan,  going  vp  out  of  the  -watery — Bap- 
tism at  ^non — Consideration  of  Rom.  6. 3-6.  and  CoL 
2.  12 — reasons  for  baptism  by  sprinkling — those  bap- 
tized on  the  day  of  Pentecost — the  jailor — St.  Paul — 
CorneUus — Reasons  against  immersion — Baptism  of 
the  Spirit — concluding  remarks  on  the  mode. 

In  opposing  Mr.  Campbell's  views  of  the  na- 
ture and  design  of  baptism,  we  have  said  nothing 
about  the  mode.  Our  object  has  been  to  show, 
that  the  saving  virtue  he  attaches  to  the  ordi- 
nance is  unscriptural,  without  seeming  to  ques- 
tion the  correctness  of  his  assumption,  that  im- 
mersion is  indispensable  to  the  performance  of 
that  ordinance.  Leaving  it  for  our  readers  to 
determine  how  far  we  have  succeeded,  we  shall 
now  invite  their  attention  to  a  difierent  view  of 
the  subject,  by  endeavoring  to  demonstrate  that 
the  claims  he  sets  up  for  the  immersed  on  the 
ground  that  they  only  are  baptized,  are  about  as 
modest  and  as  well  founded  as  those  of  the 
grand  Turk,  who  assumes  to  be  lord  of  the 
whole  earth,  while  destitute  of  the  power  to  save 
his  own  person  from  the  hand  of  the  assassin. 

That  the  mode  of  baptism  has  been  a  fruitful 
source  of  controversy  among  christians,  is 
known  to  us  and  to  most  of  our  readers.    Upon 


'I 

I 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  121 

it  SO  much  has  been  said,  and  so  many  volumes 
written,  that  we  have  not  the  vanity  to  suppose 
we  shall  be  able  to  travel  an  unbeaten  road,  or 
to  claim  originality  for  our  arguments.  Indeed, 
we  should  have  said  nothing  on  the  subject,  but 
for  the  "  great  swelling  words"  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell and  his  followers,  and  the  fear  that  our  si- 
lence might  be  construed  into  a  tacit  acknow- 
ledgment of  the  justice  of  their  assertions.  To 
avoid  this  imputation,  and  with  the  hope  of 
benefiting  those  who  may  not  have  time  or  in- 
clination to  peruse  works  in  which  this  subject 
is  thoroughly  investigated,  we  propose  to  take 
a  brief  survey  of  the  ground  of  the  ultra  immer- 
sionist,  and  offer  some  reasons  for  dissenting 
from  his  conclusions. 

The  first  argument  commonly  resorted  to  in 
support  of  immersion,  and  in  opposition  to 
every  other  mode,  is  predicated  on  the  meaning 
of  the  original  Avord.  And  here  it  is  well 
known,  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  assumed  the  re- 
sponsibility of  settling  the  question,  by  the  sum- 
mary method  of  translating  the  term  in  accord- 
ance with  his  own  notions.  In  his  garbled  and 
deformed  Testament,  palmed  upon  the  public 
as  the  production  of  Dr.  Doddridge,  and  others, 
BAPTO,  and  its  derivatives  are  uniformly  trans- 
lated in  the  sense  of  immersion  ;  and  in  justifi- 
cation of  this  daring  procedure,  he  asserts  in  a 
note  in  the  same  book,  concerning  the  word 
BAPTizo,  that  **  all  lexicographers  translate  it 
by  the  word  immerse,  dip  or  plunge  ;  not  one 
by  sprinkle  or  pour."  All  this,  we  are  aware, 
6  L 


122  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

can  do  no  harm  to  the  intelligent,  who  will  be 
at  the  pains  of  examining  the  matter  for  them- 
selves, for  they  will  at  once  see  that  the  asser- 
tion is  untrue,  and  that  the  translation,  at  least, 
is  questionable  ;  but  others  who  have  not  the 
means  of  detecting  the  fallacy  of  this  course, 
may  be  deceived  by  it,  as  doubtless  many  have 
been.     Those  who  are  ignorant  of  the  original, 
and  of  the   opinions  of  the  learned,  and  have 
confidence  in  Mr.  Campbell's  ability  and  inte- 
grity, will  be  naturally  led  by  his  translation 
and  bold  assertions,  to  conclude  that  the  origi- 
nal word  means    immersion,  and  nothing  else. 
But  neither  this  conclusion  nor  the  assertion, 
that  all  lexicographers  have  so  understood  it,  is 
founded  in  truth.     It  may  be  true,  that  all  lexi- 
cographers and  all  linguists,  have  considered 
immersion  as  one  meaning  of  the  original  term, 
but  it  is  not  true  that  all,  or  that  many  of  them 
have  viewed  it  in  this  sense  only.     Parkhurst, 
says,  it  means  "  to  immerse  in,  or  wash  with 
water,  in  token  of  purification  from  sin."     Ac- 
cording to  Ainsworth,  "  to  baptize,  is  to  wash 
any  one   in  the   sacred  baptismal   font,  or   to 
sprinkle  on  him  the  consecrated  water."     And 
with  this  opinion  Ewing's  Greek  and  English 
Lexicon,  Calmet's  Dictionary,  and  most  persons 
of  reputable    attainments    in  Greek  literature 
agree.     With  these  facts  before  him,  the  reader' 
will  place  a  proper  estimate  upon  the  sayings 
and  doings  of  him,  who  can   deliberately  avei 
that  all  the  learned  have  so  translated  the  origi- 
nal as  to  confine  it  to  immersion. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  123 

Every  man  v/ho  lias  an  acquaintance  with  tlie 
Greek  language,  sufficient  to  enable  him  to  learn 
the  meaning  of  a  word  by  the  use  of  a  lexicon, 
may  know  if  he  will  take  the  trouble  to  exam- 
ine, that  BAPTizo,  with  its  kindred  terms,  is  so 
variously  applied,  that  no  one  word,  to  the  ex- 
clusion of  all  others,  can  explain  its  meaning. 
Perhaps  it  was  originally  used  to  express  ting- 
ing or  colouring  ;  and  hence  Homer,  long  be- 
fore the  Savior  appeared  in  the  world,  speaks 
of  a  lake  being  baptized  with  the  blood  of  a 
frog.  In  this  sense  it  was  not  used  to  designate 
the  manner  or  mode  of  the  process,  but  the  act 
of  coloring,  or  the  condition  of  the  object  acted 
upon.  When  this  term  came  to  be  applied  to 
other  purposes,  Vv^e  find  the  Greeks  using  it  to 
denote  all  kinds  of  washing,  and  every  mode  of 
purifying  with  water,  and  this  is  the  sense  in 
which  it  is  uniformly  used  by  the  New  Testa- 
ment writers.  Even  if  it  were  true  that  bapto 
means  nothing  but  immersion,  it  would  not  fol- 
low that  the  New  Testament  term,  baptizo,  a 
derivative  of  the  former,  signifies  the  same.  De- 
rivatives of  this  class  imply  less  than  their  pri- 
mitives, and  in  many  cases  materially  change 
the  sense.  But  it  is  not  true  that  bapto  in  all 
insto^ices  implies  immersion.  In  the  book  of 
Daniel,  iv,  33,  we  read  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
"was  driven  from  men,  and  did  eat  grass  as 
oxen,  and  his  body  was  wet  with  the  dew  of 
heaven."  The  word  wet  in  the  Greek  of  the 
LXX  is  bapto:  "His  body  was  baptized  with 
the  dew  of  heaven."     Here  then,  according  to 


124  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

the  original  import  of  the  term,  a  man  is  bapti- 
zed by  the  sprinkling  of  dew  upon  his  body  ; 
and  hence,  if  it  means  the  application  of  water 
in  one  mode,  and  only  one,  we  have  the  most 
positive  proof  that  that  mode  is  not  immersion, 
but  sprinkling.  But  we  place  no  reliance  upon 
this  in  determining  the  manner  of  administer- 
ing baptism  as  a  religious  ordinance,  and  have 
only  adduced  it  to  show  the  folly  of  attempting 
to  confine  the  word,  in  its  original  import,  to 
immersion. 

As  already  remarked,  baptizo  and  its  deriva- 
tives in  the  New  Testament,  are  used  to  denote 
all  kinds  of  washings,  also  the  various  ceremo- 
nial purifications  practiced  by  the  Jews,  some 
of  which  are  well  known  to  have  been  mere 
sprinklings.  Some  people  seem  wholly  unable 
to  comprehend  how  pouring  and  immersion  can 
both  be  baptism  ;  but  St.  Paul,  Heb.  ix,  10, 
speaks  of  "  divers  washings"  (in  the  original 
baptisms,)  as  existing  among  the  Jews,  which, 
by  reference  to  Numbers  xix,  7-19,  are  shown 
to  have  been  performed  both  by  dipping  and 
sprinkling.  We  read,  Mark  vii,  4,  that  the 
Pharisees  held  to  "  the  washing  (in  the  Greek, 
baptizing)  of  cups  and  pots,  brazen  vessels,  and 
of  tables,"  or  "  beds"  as  it  stands  in  the  mar- 
gin. As  all  persons  hold  to  the  baptizing  or 
washing  of  such  utensils  for  the  purpose  of 
cleansing  them,  it  is  quite  probable  from  the 
nature  of  the  charge,  that  the  practice  of  the 
Pharisees  originated  in  superstitious  notions  of 
purification  ;  but  be  this  as  it  may,  it  is  certain 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED  125 

that  these  things  were  not  all  baptized  by  im- 
mersion. The  '*  cups  and  pots"  may  have  been 
dipt  in  the  water,  but  who  can  imagine  this  of 
their  "  tables  or  beds?"  These  were  construct- 
ed of  sufficient  size  to  accommodate  them  at 
their  meals,  which  they  ate  in  a  reclining  pos- 
ture, and  for  from  three  to  five  persons  to  lie 
down  upon  at  their  ease.  Surely  no  person 
can  be  so  extravagant  as  to  suppose  it  was  the 
custom  of  the  Pharisees,  to  carry  these  out  and 
immerse  them  in  the  water  before  their  meals, 
or  on  any  other  occasion.  But  the  couches 
were  baptized  as  well  as  the  cups  and  pots  ; 
and  while  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  the 
latter  were  immersed,  it  is  quite  certain  that  the 
former  were  not. 

Many  other  examples  might  be  adduced,  but 
these  are  in  point,  and  amply  sufficient  to  show 
that  the  attempt  to  substitute  immersioyi  for 
baptism  is  not  authorized  by  the  original.  In- 
deed, the  meanings  of  the  original  are  so  nume- 
rous, that  nothing  from  thence  can  be  proved 
concerning  the  primitive  mode  of  baptism;  and 
though  the  controversy  on  this  ground  has  been 
carried  on  to  weariness,  it  has  been,  and  always 
will  be  pretty  much  in  character  with  the  poet's 
picture  of  the  three  men,  who  quarrelled  about 
the  color  of  the  chamelion.  In  proof,  take  the 
following  summary,  embracing  only  a  portion 
of  the  meanings  of  this  accommodating  word. 
The  verb  bapto  with  its  derivatives,  signifies  to 
dip  the  hand  into  a  dish,  Matt,  xxvi,  23 ;  to 
stain  a  vesture  with  blood,  Rev.  xix,  13;  to  wet 
L  2 


126  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

the  body  with  dew,  Dan.  iv,  33  ;  to  suffer  and 
die,  Mark  x,  38;  to  paint  or  smear  the  face  with 
colors;  to  stain  the  hand  by  pressing  a  coloring 
substance  ;  to  pour  water  upon  the  hands  ;  to 
be  drunken  with  wine  ;  to  sprinkle  with  water; 
and  to  immerse  wholly  or  partially  in  water. 
Its  application  in  some  of  these  cases  we  have 
previously  shown,  and  are  prepared  to  produce 
examples  of  its  use  in  all  the  others,  and  many 
more,  whenever  it  shall  be  necessary.  A  word 
then  of  such  extensive  application,  affords  as 
strong  proof  for  sprinkling  or  pouring,  as  for 
immersion,  and  to  say  that  the  former  is  not 
baptism  is  as  unjustifiable,  as  to  say  that  the 
latter  is  not,  Mr.  Campbell's  translations  and 
assertions  to  the  contrary  notwithstanding. 

The  truth  is,  the  term  immersion,  is  not  found 
in  the  Bible  ;  nor  is  there  any  word  in  the  ori- 
ginal Scriptures  having  any  connection  with 
baptism,  that  would  authorize,  exclusively,  the 
word  immersion  as  its  translation.  We  do  not 
expect  Campbellites,  who  know  nothing  of  the 
matter,  to  believe  this  assertion ;  and  some  of 
them  who  have  the  means  of  learning  its  truth 
within  their  reach,  we  fear,  have  too  much  faith 
in  the  ipse  dixit  of  their  leader,  to  receive  any 
thing  that  would  cross  his  track,  though  pro- 
claimed by  an  angel  from  heaven.  Many  of  his 
followers,  so  soon  as  they  have  read  his  New 
Testament  and  Millennial  Harbinger,  become  in 
their  own  estimation,  linguists  and  critics  ;  and 
some,  while  destitute  even  of  a  knowledge  of 
the  Greek  alphabet,  do  not  scruple  to  assert  in 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  127 

the  presence  of  hundreds,  not  only  that  baptizo 
means  immersion,  and  should  always  be  so  ren- 
dered, but  that  it  is  the  only  word  in  the  Greek 
language  that  can  be  used  in  this  sense.  We 
do  not  know^  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  ever  au- 
thorized the  latter  part  of  this  assertion,  but  we 
do  know  that  that,  as  well  as  the  former,  has 
not  the  authority  of  truth.  The  Greek  words 
DUNO  and  dupto  may  be  properly  confined  in 
their  translation  to  the  idea  of  immersion  ;  but 
they,  so  far  from  being  used  to  define  the  mode 
of  baptism,  do  not  occur  in  the  New  Testament; 
while  BAPTIZO,  as  already  shown,  cannot  with 
any  propriety  be  restricted  to  that  meaning. 

Indeed  it  is  doubted  whether  this  word  in 
any  case,  where  the  rite  of  baptism  is  designa- 
ted, necessarily  means  immersion  ;  because  the 
various  purposes  to  which  it  is  applied,  render 
it  evident  that  it  does  not  express  the  manner 
of  doing  a  thing,  whether  by  immersion  or 
pouring,  but  only  the  thing  done  ;  that  is,  wash- 
ing, or  the  application  of  water  in  some  form 
or  other.  And  here  we  have  sufficient  ground 
for  considering  baptism  as  valid,  v/hether  per- 
formed by  affusion  or  immersion  ;  and  good 
reason  for  rejecting  any  effort  to  translate  the 
word  so  as  to  determine  the  mode.  Should  it 
ever  be  translated  by  a  competent  individual, 
free  from  sectarian  bigotry  and  selfish  partyism, 
the  rendering  will  probably  be,  to  ivash  or  ivet 
with  water  ;  but  this  v/ould  leave  the  question 
cf  the  mode,  where  it  is  at  present,  and  where 
we  believe  the  Almighty  designed  it  to  remain, 


128  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

to  be  determined  by  circumstances,  and  the 
consciences  of  those  concerned.  It  has  been 
geen  that  the  rendering  we  here  suppose  is  used 
in  the  case  of  Nebuchadnezzar — baptized,  wet, 
with  the  dew  of  heaven — and  we  are  confident 
it  comes  much  nearer  the  original  than  Mr. 
Campbell's,  and  probably  as  near  as  any  that 
could  be  given.  For  illustration  :  The  mistress 
of  a  family  commands  her  servant  to  washy  or 
wel  her  hands,  as  preparatory  to  the  discharge 
of  some  duty.  Whether  the  servant  immerse 
her  hands,  or  pour  water  upon  them,  is  an  un- 
important circumstance — the  command  is  obey- 
ed whenever  they  are  brought  into  the  condition 
required.  Again,  I  observe,  7ny  handkerchief 
is  wet.  Does  this  language  tell  you  whether 
it  has  been  dipt  in  the  water,  or  left  in  the  rain? 
Certainly  not.  It  simply  declares  the  condition 
of  the  article,  and  makes  no  allusion  to  the 
manner  of  producing  it.  Now  let  the  original 
term  be  understood  in  this  light,  and  the  mode 
of  applying  the  water  of  baptism,  so  far  as  the 
force  or  meaning  of  the  word  is  concerned,  will 
no  longer  be  a  bone  of  contention  among  intel- 
ligent christians.  Had  the  Savior  intended  to 
enjoin  either  immersion  or  affusion  exclusively, 
and  in  all  cases,  it  would  have  been  easy  to  use 
terms  that  could  not  have  been  misapprehended; 
but  as  he  chose  to  employ  words  of  a  different 
character  and  designed  the  adaptation  of  the 
institution  to  every  climate,  and  to  all  circum- 
stances, it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  he  had  no 
wish  to  make  the  mode  of  applying  the  water 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED  129 

an  important  consideration.  This  much,  at  any 
rate,  is  certain,  the  force  of  the  original  language 
does  not  fix  the  mode;  and  consequently,  any 
effort  to  settle  this  matter  by  a  new  translation, 
whether  it  be  the  offspring  of  ignorance  or 
vanity,  or  originate  in  a  desperate  resolve  to 
found  a  sect,  ought  to  be  discountenanced. 

Having  shown,  that  the  import  of  the  word  in 
the  original,  gives  no  authority  for  the  exclusive 
immersion  translation,  we  proceed  to  notice 
another  class  of  arguments  adduced  in  support 
of  the  same  cause.  As  baptizo  may  be,  and 
sometimes  is,  used  in  the  sense  of  immersion, 
we  readily  admit  that  it  might  be  so  connected 
with  circumstances  and  qualifying  terms,  as  to 
confine  its  use,  in  a  religious  ordinance,  to  that 
sense.  And  as  it  has  been  contended  that  the 
circumstances  recorded  in  the  New  Testament, 
as  connected  with  the  performance  of  baptism, 
are  of  this  character,  and  do  thus  determine  the 
mode,  we  ask  the  reader  to  accompany  us  while 
we  inspect  those  cases.  They  are  neither  nu- 
merous nor  difficult  of  examination.  If  they 
contain  evidence  of  immersion,  we  shall  soon 
find  it. 

In  the  third  chapter  of  Matthew  we  read  that 
John  baptized  "  in  Jordan  ;"  and  this  has,  by 
some,  been  thought  to  be  conclusive  proof  that 
he  immersed.  But  it  is  more  likely  that  "  in," 
is  here  used  to  denote  the  place  where  he  bap- 
tized, or  the  water  with  which  he  administered, 
than  to  point  out  the  manner  or  modes  of  the 
ordinance.  The  same  Greek  word  here  ren- 
6* 


130  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

dered  in,  is  translated  "  af  in  more  than  one 
hundred  places  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
"  witK''  in  a  hundred  and  fifty  others.*  There- 
fore, in  this  passage  it  may  only  mean,  that 
.John  baptized  at  Jordan,  or  rvith  the  water  of 
Jordan. 

Further  evidence  is  claimed  from  the  same 
chapter,  in  the  declaration  that  Jesus  v/hen  he 
was  baptized  "  went  up  out  of  the  water." 
But  it  is  easy  to  show  that  this,  so  far  from 
proving  immersion  in  his  case,  does  not  even 
prove  that  he  was  in  the  water.  .  Apo,  the  ori- 
ginal word  here  rendered  "out  of,"  frequently 
means  from,  and  is  so  translated  in  this  chap- 
ter. John  says  to  those  who  came  to  him, 
"  who  hath  v/arned  you  to  flee  (apo)  from  the 
wrath  to  come."  This  translation  is  here  un- 
questionably correct ;  for  as  the  "  wrath"  spo- 
ken of  had  not  then  come,  they  were  not  in  it, 
and  consequently  could  not  ilee  "  out  of"  it. 
But  it  was  coming,  therefore  they  could  flee 
from  it.  In  this  case,  then,  it  is  clear  that  apo 
means  from  ;  and  in  the  other  case  we  do  no 
violence  to  the  word,  or  to  any  thing  in  the  con- 
text, by  reading  that  "  Jesus  when  he  was  bap- 
tized, went  up  from  the  water."  And  ss  he 
could  do  this  without  so  much  as  wetting  his 
feet,  it  furnishes  no  evidence  that  he  was  im- 
mersed. 

Another  case  of  very  common  resort,  and  of 

•  See  Watson's  and  Martindale's  Dictionaries  on  the 
word  baptize. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  131 

much  reliance,  is  the  baptism  of  the  eunuch, 
mentioned  Acts,  viii ;  where  it  is  said,  "  they 
went  down  both  into  the  water,  both  Philip  and 
the  eunuch,  and  he  baptized  him."  This  going 
down  into  the  water  is  supposed  to  be  positive 
proof  that  the  Ethiopian  eunuch  was  immersed. 
But  when  it  is  known  that  the  preposition  here 
rendered  "  into,"  often  means  Only  to.,  or  unto, 
and  is  so  translated  in  the  Scriptures,  every  can- 
did person  will  at  once  see,  that  the  passage 
proves  nothing  to  the  pomt. 

We  pause  here  to  notice  the  very  disingenu- 
ous manner  by  which  Mr.  Campbell,  and  others 
before  him,  have  endeavored  to  escape  this  dif- 
ficulty relative  to  the  original  word  just  advert- 
ed to.    They  tell  us  if  eis  signifies  to,  that  the 
righteous  will  get  to  heaven,  but  not  into  it. 
This  miserable  evasion  will  be  properly  appre- 
ciated by  those  who  are   aware   that  the  pedo- 
baptists    have  not  contended  that  the  original 
should  never  be  rendered  "into."    All  that  we 
insist  upon  is,  that  it  means  to,  as  well  as  into. 
And  he  who  denies  this,  is  either  too  ignorant, 
,  or  too  reckless  of  truth,  to  merit  even  a  passing 
^notice  as  a  controversialist. 
\    Great  stress  has  been  placed  upon  the  phrases, 
**  in  Jordan,"  "  into  the  water,"  and  "  out  of 
the  water,"  in  this  controversy  ;  and  some  have 
even  supposed  that  the  man  who  can  read  them, 
and  not  be  converted  to  the  immersion  theory, 
is  either  dishonest,  or  destitute  of  a  mind  for 
the  investigation  of  such  subjects.     But  while 
we  know  that  the  original  terms,  are  so  trans- 


133  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

lated  in  other  passages,  as  to  authorize  us  in 
these  to  read,  "John  baptized  at  Jordan," 
*'  Jesus  went  up  fro7n  the  water,"  "  both  Philip 
and  the  eunuch  went  down  to  the  water,"  we 
shall  continue  to  believe,  and  to  assert,  that 
there  is  here  no  more  proof  of  immersion,  than 
of  sprinkling  or  pouring. 

But. to  waive  all  this,  and  to  take  these  pas- 
sages just  as  they  stand,  and  allow  them  all 
the  force  to  which  they  are  entitled,  either  in 
classical  or  ordinary  use,  and  what  do  they 
prove  ?  Certainly  not  that  John  immersed  the 
Savior,  or  that  Philip  immersed  the  eunuch. 
But  they  do  prove  that  there  is  no  proof  of  im- 
mersion in  either  case.  In  the  case  of  the  eunuch, 
the  going  *'  down  into  the  water,"  is  often  re- 
ferred to  as  evidence  that  he  was  immersed — 
as  incontrovertible  proof  of  the  fact ;  and  yet 
that  very  passage  demonstrates  that  going  "  down 
into  the  water,"  and  being  baptized  are  different 
things  ;  for,  after  they  had  gone  down,  it  is  ad- 
ded that  "  Philip  baptized  him."  Therefore,  as 
these  things  are  separate,  and  the  going  down 
irdo  the  water,  was  previous  to  the  baptism,  it 
follows  that  the  preposition  *'  into,"  gives  no 
information  as  to  the  mode  of  his  baptism. 

Previous  impressions  are  often  a  great  diffi- 
culty to  our  arriving  at  the  truth  ;  hence  it  ia  a 
settled  principle  in  jurisprudence  that  the  man 
who  has  prejudged  the  case,  is  incompetent  to 
try  the  accused.  Many  who  are  sincere  inquirers 
after  truth,  are  convinced  before  they  have  at- 
tended to  the  evidence,  that  baptism  and  plung- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  133 

ing  are  inseparable,  and  consequently,  however 
disposed,  they  are  not  prepared  to  give  the  case 
an  impartial  hearing.  This  deep-rooted  impres- 
sion is  probably  the  eftect  of  the  circumstance, 
that  the  largest  and  most  respectable  denomina- 
tion among  the  sects  that  practice  immersion 
exclusively,    is  known  by  the  name  Baptist. 
This  circumstance,  seeing  those  who  are  called 
Baptists,  uniformly  putting  their  converts  under 
the  water,  has  a  natural  tendency  to  produce 
upon  the  minds  of  the  multitude,  the  impres- 
sion that  to  baptize  means  to  immerse.     With 
this  notion  they  read  the  passages  we  have  been 
considering,  and  are  satisfied,  not  by  any  evi- 
dence they  contain  as  to  the  mode,  but  because 
they  find  in  them  nothing  to  contradict  their 
previous  views.     Now,  could  they  divest  them- 
selves of  the  preconceived  and  erroneous  opin- 
ion, that  to  baptize  necessarily  means  to  im- 
merse ;  and  understand  it  in  its  more  proper 
signification,  to  wash,  or  to  ivet  with  water^ 
every  candid  inquirer,  would  at  once  see  that 
these  passages  contain  not  one  particle  of  evi- 
dence that  dipping  was  the  primitive  mode  of 
baptism.     It  is  true  we  may  go  down  into  the 
water  and  then  be  dipt  under  it ;  but  it  is  equal- 
ly true,  that  we  may  go  down  into  the  water, 
be  baptized  by  pouring,  or  sprinkling,  and  then 
come  up  out  of  the  water,  and  all  without  hav- 
ing been  immersed  ankle  deep. 

What  we  have  said,  with  regard  to  the  phra- 
ses *'  into"  and  "  out  of  the  water,"  we  consider 
so  plain  and  conclusive  that  no  unbiased  mind 
M 


134  campb'ellism  exposed. 

can  fail  to  admit  that  they  do  not  sustain  the 
immersion  cause  ;  but  they  are  so  commonly 
adduced  !n  its  support,  and  considered  of  such 
force  and  virtue  in  the  controversy,  that  we  offer 
an  additional  remark.  The  common  use  of 
these  phrases,  in  the  every  day  occurrences  of 
life,  shows  the  absurdity  of  supposing  them  to 
prove  immersion.  From  many  examples  that 
might  be  given,  we  select  the  following :  The 
mother  accuses  her  child  of  having  been  ^n  the 
water,  when  she  only  means  that  it  has  been  at 
or  hy  the  water,  wetting  its  hands  or  its  clothes  ; 
and  again,  we  hear  her  say,  "  Come  out  of  that 
water."  But  this  command  never  leads  us  to 
suppose  that  the  child  is  under  the  water ;  we 
know  she  only  intends  to  call  it  away  from  it. 
It  is  thus  seen,  that  the  common  application  of 
these  terms  conveys  no  idea  of  immersion ;  and 
why  such  an  idea  should  be  attached  to  them, 
when  used  by  the  sacred  writers,  is  more  than 
we  can  comprehend,  and  a  procedure  for  which 
"we  have  never  seen  a  sufficient  reason.  Indeed, 
one  of  the  passages  from  which  the  preposition 
*'  into"  is  brought  to  prove  a  case  of  immersion, 
makes  it  clear  that  it  proves  nothing.  We  read, 
"  they  v/ent  down  both  into  the  water,  both 
Philip  and  the  eunuch."  Now,  if  into  means 
under,  with  regard  to  the  eunuch,  it  can  imply 
nothing  less  of  Philip ;  for  it  is  applied  equally 
to  both.  But  neither  Campbellites  nor  Baptists 
will  admit  that  the  latter  was  immersed  ;  and 
in  this  they  concede  that  the  passage  contain* 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  136 

no  evidence  of  the  immersion  of  the  former ; 
which  is  all  we  contend  for. 

The  next  proof  resorted  to  in  favor  of  im- 
mersion, is  John,  iii,  23,  where  it  is  stated  that 
"John  also  was  baptizing  in  ^non,  near  to 
Salim,  because  there  was  much  water  there." 
This  is  one  of  the  immersionist's  strong  holds. 
He  can  see  no  reason  why  John  should  baptize 
where  there  was  much  water,  or  why  he  should 
convene  the  multitudes  at  Jordan,  except  for 
the  purpose  of  plunging  his  converts.  But  the 
truth  is,  we  shall  find  no  difficulty  in  assigning 
a  plausible  and  sufficient  reason,  without  sup- 
posing immersion  in  either  case.  In  Judea,  it 
is  a  well  known  fact,  that  springs  were  rare, 
and  water  scarce.  That  which  was  needed  for 
domestic  purposes,  had  daily  to  be  brought  from 
the  nearest  rivers  and  fountains,  in  pitchers,  by 
the  women  ;  v/hich  rendered  the  supply  scanty, 
and  entirely  insufficient  to  quench  the  thirst  of  a 
multitude.  John's  preaching  roused  the  country. 
The  inhabitants  of  "Jerusalem  and  Judea,  and 
all  the  region  round  about  Jordan,"  came  to  his 
baptism.  Where  could  such  multitudes  as- 
semble ?  Certainly  not  in  a  house,  for  no  house 
would  contain  them.  They  must,  then,  resort 
to  the  fields  or  woods  ;  and  as  they  would  need 
water,  not  only  for  baptism,  even  if  administer- 
ed by  aspersion,  but  for  the  purpose  of  drinking, 
it  was  natural  for  them  to  assemble  in  the  neigh- 
borhood of  some  river  or  fountain.  This  is  ex- 
emplified in  the  location  of  our  camp  meetings, 
and  other  large  popular  meetings  of  the  present 


130  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

day.  Though  they  are  not  designed  for  immer- 
sion, nor  especially  for  baptism  by  any  other 
mode,  it  is  found  necessary  to  select  a  situation 
contiguous  to  "  much  water,"  and  after  all,  we 
sometimes  find  numbers  there  suffering  for  want 
of  it.     In  this  view  of  the  subject,  we  see  a 
good  reason,  and  very  probably  the  true  one, 
why  John  baptized  in  ^non,  and  at  Jordan. 
They  were  the  most  convenient  places,  in  view 
of  the  wants  of  the  multitudes,  either  with  or 
without  reference  to  baptism,    and  whether  the 
mode  of  that  ordinance  was  sprinkling  or  other- 
wise.    But  be  this  as  it  may,  the  conclusion 
drawn  from  this  passage  in  favor  of  immersion, 
is  an  unauthorized  assumption — a  mere  supposi' 
tion ;    and  a  thousand  such  suppositions  do  not 
prove  one  truth.  The  "  much  water"  of  -^non, 
never  has  proved,  nor  can  it  ever  prove  that  one 
of  John's  disciples  was  immersed  in  it ;  or  that 
there  was  there  a  stream  or  fountain  of  water 
of  sufficient  depth  to  admit  the  immersion  of 
even  the    child.     We  are  aware  that  immer- 
sionists  have  magnified  iEnon  into  a  place  of 
"great  waters;"  but  unfortunately  for  their  cause, 
no  such  powerful  stream,  or  fountain  fit  for  the 
plunging  of  multitudes,  is  described  in  the  geo- 
graphy of  the  country,  or  has  ever  been  dis- 
covered by  travelers.     The  supposition  of  the 
existence  of  such  a  reason  is  as  gratuitous,  as 
the  proof  of  immersion  from  the   passage    is 
impossible. 

We  find  then,  that  this  instance,  as  well  as 
those  previously  examined,  entirely  fails  to  serve 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  137 

the  cause  of  immersion.  And  these,  as  to  the 
historical  evidence  of  the  New  Testament,  are 
the  main  dependence  of  that  cause.  In  reality, 
they  are  the  only  passages  in  which  tlie  said 
history  seems  to  make  any  approach  to  immer- 
sion. John's  baptizing  in  Jordan,  and  in  ^Enon, 
and  the  baptism  of  the  eunuch  by  Philip,  are 
the  only  circumstances  mentioned  in  the  New 
Testament,  of  tlie  performance  of  baptism  at  a 
river  or  fountain  of  water ;  they  are,  therefore, 
the  only  cases  that  present  any  thing  like  the 
appearance  of  immersion;  and  no  sooner  are  they 
brought  to  the  test  of  fair  criticism,  and  sober 
investigation,  than  even  this  appearance  is  en- 
tirely dissipated.  Where,  then,  are  the  facts  to 
justify  Mr.  Campbell's  translation,  or  his  as- 
sertion, that  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  "  no 
person  was  said  to  be  converted  to  God,  until 
he  was  buried  in,  and  raised  out  of  the  water  ?" 
It  is  certain  they  are  not  found  in  the  Scriptures  ; 
and  hence,  this  assertion  is  worth  no  more  than 
one  that  should  wholly  contradict  it.  Neither 
Mr.  Campbell,  nor  any  one  else,  can  produce 
one  clear  case  of  immersion  among  all  the  per- 
sons baptized,  from  the  beginning  of  John's 
baptism,  to  the  close  of  the  apocalypse. 

We  have  now  gone  through  an  examination 
of  the  facts  recorded  in  the  New  Testament 
history  of  baptism.  And  so  far  from  sustaining 
the  immersion  theory,  we  found  them  utterly 
fail  to  prove  the  immersion  of  a  single  individ- 
ual. It  remains  for  us  now  to  examine  the 
supposed  doctrinal  allusions,  found  inborn.,  vi, 
m2 


138  CAMPBELLTSM   EXPOSED. 

and  Col.  ii,  where  we  are  said  to  be  buried 
with  Christ,  "  by  baptism,"  and  "  in  baptism." 
These  passages,  it  is  true,  record  no  fact  of 
the  baptism  of  any  individual ;  nor  does  it  ap- 
pear from  the  context,  that  the  apostle  in  wri- 
ting them  was  giving  any  directions  concerning 
the  mode  of  baptism ;  but  still,  as  our  oppo- 
nents assume  that  allusion  is  made  to  the  ordi- 
nance, and  insist  that  the  "  burial"  mentioned, 
is  unquestionable  proof  that  baptism  implies  a 
burial  in  water,  our  inquiry  would  be  incomplete 
without  them.  Now,  if  we  shall  find  upon  in- 
vestigation that  these  passages  have  no  refer- 
ence to  water  baptism,  and  that  they  are  whol- 
ly misapplied  when  brought  into  this  contro- 
versy, the  possibility  of  proving  immersion  from 
the  Scriptures  will  be  rendered  entirely  hope- 
less. 

We  notice  first  the  passage  ivova  Romans,  vi. 
3 — 6 :  "  Know  ye  not,  that  so  many  of  us  as 
were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized 
into  his  death  ?  Therefore,  v/e  are  buried  with 
him  by  baptism  into  death  ;  that  like  as  Christ 
was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of 
the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  new- 
ness of  life.  For  if  we  have  been  planted  to- 
gether in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall  be 
also  in  the  likeness  of  his  resurrection :  Knowing 
this,  that  our  old  man  is  crucified  with  him, 
that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed,  that 
henceforth  we  should  not  serve  sin."  In  a  few 
remarks  upon  this  paragraph,  we  hope  to  be 
able  to  satisfy  the  unprejudiced  reader  that  ev- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  139 

ery  argument  drawn  from  it  in  favor  of  immer- 
sion is  inapplicable,  and  only  proves  the  weak- 
ness of  the  cause  it  is  called  up  to  sustain.  The 
most   ordinary    reader  \vill   discover  that    the 
above  passage,  in  some  respects,  is  highly  fig- 
urative.    The  apostle  had  just  established,  by 
unanswerable  arguments,  a  fundamental  princi- 
ple of  the  christian  religion — the  justification 
of  the  sinner  by  faith  alone  ^  and  he  is  now 
proving  that  this  doctrine  gives  no  license  for 
committing  sin,  and  cannot  lead  to  licentious- 
ness of  life.    Hence,  he  anticipates  the  legalist, 
whether  Jew  or  Campbellite,  objecting  to  the 
doctrine    of  justification    "by    faith,    without 
works,"  on  the   ground  that  if  it  be  true,  we 
may  go  on  to  sin,   and   the  more  we  sin,   the 
more  the  grace  of  God  will  be  manifested  in 
our  forgiveness.     In  view  of  this  objection,  he 
asks  the  question,  "  Shall  we   continue  in   sin 
that  grace  may  abound?"  and  then  emphatical- 
ly answers,  "  God  forbid ;  how  shall  we  that 
are  dead   to   sin,    live    any   longer  therein?" 
Now,  the  reason  the  apostle  here  gives  why 
true  believers  cannot  continue  in  sin,   is,  that 
they  "  are  dead  to  sin."     This  death  is  un- 
questionably to  be  understood  figuratively,  for 
none  will  suppose  him  to  mean  the  extinction 
of  natural  life ;  and  having  mentioned,  in  this 
sense,  our  being  "  dead  to  sin,"   he   proceeds, 
in  the  same  figurative  strain,  to  speak  of  a  bur- 
ial, and   a  resurrection.     Nor  is   this  all,  for 
enlarging  the  figure  in  the  5th  and  6th  verses, 
he  represents  us  as  being  ^^ planted'''  and  ^^cru- 


140  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

cified  with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be 
destroyed ;"  and  this  planting  and  crucifixion, 
are  effected  by  baptism,  just  as  the  burial  is. 
These  latter  verses  are  so  inseparably  connec' 
ted  with  the  former,  that  the  sense  of  the  par- 
ragraph  is  incomplete  without  them.  Why 
then  do  not  the  advocates  for  immersion,  in 
quoting  the  passage,  go  forward  to  these,  and 
show  us  a  resemblance,  not  only  between  bap- 
tism by  immersion,  and  the  burial  of  Christ,  but 
also  between  immersion,  and  being  "  planted 
and  crucified"  with  Christ?  There  is,  indeed, 
no  resemblance  between  a  dip,  or  plunge  in  the 
water,  and  the  burial  of  Christ  in  the  sepulchre  ; 
and  hence  some  intelligent  Baptist  writers, 
among  whom  are  Mr.  Robinson,  the  historian, 
and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Judson,  missionary  in  the 
East  Indies,  have  conceded  from  the  entire  lack 
of  similarity  in  the  two  cases,  that  this  text 
proves  nothing  concerning  water  baptism.  But 
if  it  were  otherwise,  and  the  resemblance  be- 
tween an  immersion  in  water,  and  the  mode  of 
the  Savior's  burial  was  obvious  to  all,  before 
this  passage  can  be  made  to  bear  on  the  mode 
of  administering  baptism,  a  similar  resemblance 
must  be  found  between  immersion  and  the  plant- 
ing of  trees,  and  between  immersion  and  the 
crucifixion  of  our  Savior ;  for  all  these  are  rep- 
resented  as  being  accomplished    by    baptism. 

But  no  such  resemblance  can  be  shown ;  it 
is,  therefore,  vain  to  predicate  an  argument  up- 
on this  passage  in  favor  of  immersion. 

To  make  the  subject  more  clear,  let  it  be  ob- 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  141 

served  that  the  text  before  us  represents  four 
things  as  being  done  to  and  for  believers  "  by 
baptism,"  viz.  they  are  said  to  be  planted,  cm- 
ci/iecl,  dead,  and  buried.  The  immersionist, 
seizing  upon  the  latter  in  support  of  his  theory, 
insists  that  the  burial  is  to  be  understood 'in  a 
literal  sense  ;  and  hence  concludes  that  baptism 
necessarily  implies  immersion.  But  neither  the 
planting,  the  crucifixion,  nor  the  death,  which 
we  are  said  to  experience,  can  be  taken  in  this 
literal  sense.  No  man  who  has  not  taken  leave 
of  his  wits,  will  for  a  moment  imagine  that  the 
believer  is  literally  planted  in  the  earth,  or  that 
he  dies  by  crucijixion,  as  did  the  Savior.  It 
will  be  universally  conceded  that  these  are  to 
be  understood  figuratively.  The  case,  then, 
resolves  itself  into  this;  of  four  things,  inse- 
parably connected  by  the  apostle,  and  perform- 
ed by  the  same  agent,  upon  the  same  individu- 
al, and  at  the  same  time,  three  are  clearly  and 
manifestly  spoken  by  way  of  figure,  and  can 
only  be  accomplished  in  a  spiritual  manner. 
And  hence,  it  is  certainly  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  other  is  subject  to  the  same  interpre- 
tation. He  who  refuses  to  admit  this,  and  still 
contends  that  the  burial  must  imply  a  literal 
burial  of  the  body  in  water,  outrages  fair  crit- 
icism and  common  sense,  and  recklessly  fighta 
with  the  fearful  odds  of  three  to  one  against 
him. 

The  absurdity  of  the  idea  that  the  burial  here 
mentioned  signifies  immersion,  appears  further, 
from  the  consideration  that  every  burial  implies 


142  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

three  things ;  namely,  an  agent,  an  action,  and 
an  object  acted  upon  ;  but  on  the  present  sup- 
position we  find  in  this  case  but  two  of  these 
things,  the  agent  and  the  action  being  the  same, 
and  making  but  one.  Baptism  we  arc  told  is 
a  btlrial,  and  yet  the  apostle  says  we  are  "  bu- 
ried by  baptism."  Hence,  the  burial,  which 
is  the  action  performed,  becomes  the  agent  by 
which  it  is  performed  ;  and  thus  the  advocates 
of  this  view  of  the  subject  are  involved  in  the 
nonsense  of  saying,  "  we  are  buried  by  a  bti- 
rialJ" 

Should  what  we  have  said  fail  to  convince 
the  reader  that  this  passage  cannot  be  made  to 
subserve  the  cause  of  immersion,  we  have 
another  thought  to  present.  The  literal  reading 
of  the  text,  without  a  word  of  comment,  is 
sufficient  to  confute  the  idea  our  opponents  at- 
tach to  it.  They  assume  that  baptism  is  an  im- 
mersion in  water  :  and  hence  conclude  the  bu- 
rial in  the  text  to  be  water  baptism.  But  in- 
stead of  sanctioning  this,  the  apostle  wholly 
excludes  water  from  the  subject,  by  declaring 
the  burial  to  be  made  in  something  of  an  en- 
tirely different  nature.  "  Therefore,  we  are 
buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death.*' 
Now,  if  he  had  said,  "we  are  buried  into  the 
water,"  there  could  be  no  controversy  on  the 
subject,  all  would  at  once  perceive  the  correct- 
ness of  the  immersionist's  theory.  But  since 
this  is  not  the  case,  and  finding  it  written  that 
"we  are  buried,"  not  in  the  water,  but  "  into 
death,"  can  any  clear-headed,  unbiased  man, 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  143 

imagine  this  passage  to  afford  any  countenance 
to  immersion  ?  We  think  not.  For  however 
hard  St.  Paul  may  be  to  be  understood,  he  cer- 
tainly did  not  write  "  death''''  when  he  meant 
water. 

It  is  now  obvious  that  this  important  text 
cannot  be  explained  by  an  imaginary  resem- 
blance betv/een  immersion  and  the  burial  of 
Christ ;  for  no  such  resemblance  exists,  and  this 
interpretation  involves  difficulties  and  absurdities 
of  the  most  glaring  and  inexplicable  nature.  But 
what  then  shall  we  conclude  ?     That  its  mean- 
ing is  incomprehensible  ?    Certainly  not.     For 
though  the  language  is  figurative,  the  meaning 
is  plain,  and  the  interpretation  sure.     Let  it  be 
first,  remarked,  that  the  baptism  mentioned  in 
the  text,  is  that  by  which  believers  are  initia- 
ted  into  Christ,    and  become  new  creatures : 
"  Know  ye  not,  that  so  many  of  us  as  were 
baptized  into  Jesus  Christ,  were  baptized  into 
his  death  ?"     It  is  clear  then,  that  the  baptism 
by  which  we  are    said  to  be   buried,   is    that 
which  puts  us  in  Christ.  And,  now,  we  have  only 
to  ascertain  what  this  is,  and  every   difficulty 
will  be  removed.     And  fortunately,  the  apostle 
on  this  point,  in  another  part  of  his  writings, 
fully  explains  himself.     In  1  Cor.  xii.  13,  we 
read  ;  "  By  one  Spirit  are  we  all  baptized  into 
one  bodyy     The  body  here  mentioned,  is  evi- 
dently Christ,  or  rather  his  mystical  body — the 
church,  of  which  he  is  the  head.     He  is  the 
vine — we  are  the  branches.     But  we  are  here 
taught,  that  it  is  not  by  the  baptism  of  water. 


144  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

but  by  that  of  the  Spirit,  that  we  are  properly 
initiated  into  this  body,  and  put  on  Christ.  The 
whole  passage  is  now  clear.  The  baptism 
which  the  apostle  connects  with  a  burial,  is  that 
which  places  us  in  Christ;  but  it  is  "  by  one 
SjnriV  that  we  are  baptized  into  him  ;  therefore, 
the  baptism  mentioned,  is  the  baptism  of  the 
Spirit,  producing  a  death  and  bitrial  to  sin,  and 
a  7'esurrection  to  newness  of  life. 

It  only  remains  for  us  to  notice  a  parallel 
text  in  Col.  ii.  12  :  "  Buried  with  him  in  bap- 
tism, wherein  also  you  are  risen  with  him, 
through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  who 
hath  raised  him  from  the  dead."  The  para- 
graph from  which  this  is  taken,  is  similar  to  the 
one  we  have  just  considered,  and  requires  the 
same  method  of  interpretation.  In  the  preced- 
ing verse  the  apostle  had  mentioned  the  mysti- 
cal death  of  christians,  by  the  phrase,  "  putting 
off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh  ;"  then,  as 
in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  he  adds  our  mys- 
tical burial  with  Christ,  and  also  our  rising 
again  with  him.  But  this  death  is  figuratively 
to  be  understood ;  and  hence  the  burial  and 
resurrection  must  be  taken  in  the  same  sense. 

On  this  passage  v/e  offer  one  additional  re- 
mark, which  cuts  up,  root  and  branch,  the  no- 
tion that  it  contains  any  allusion  to  a  literal  bu- 
rial in  water.  The  immersionist  who  contends 
for  a  literal  burial,  contends  also  for  a  literal 
resurrection,  and  in  both  cases,  the  agent  is  the 
baptizer.  By  his  arm  alone  the  subject  is  put 
under  the  water,  and  by  the  same  means  is  he 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  145 

raised  from  it.  But  the  resurrection  mention- 
ed by  the  apostle,  is  performed  by  faith. 
"  Wherein,  also,  ye  are  risen  with  him,  through 
the  FAITH  of  the  ojieration  of  God.^^  The 
Campbellite,  then,  understanding  the  Scriptures 
as  always  meaning  what  they  say,  and  taking 
the  burial  here  to  be  immersion,  may  with 
consistency  put  the  subject  under  water,  but 
further  he  cannot  go.  He  must  leave  him  there 
to  be  raised  by  faith,  or  to  remain  immersed 
till  the  resurrection  of  the  last  day. 

Such  is  the  revolting  absurdity  of  the  assump- 
tion we  oppose,  that  its  practical  effects  would 
result  in  the  drowning  of  every  individual  bap- 
tized. Let  its  advocates  act  consistently,  and 
carry  it  out  in  practice,  and  their  converts,  like 
angel's  visits,  will  be  "  few  and  far  between." 
But  all  these  difficulties  and  absurdities  are  dis- 
sipated, when  we  take  a  proper  view  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  understand  it  to  signify  a  death  and 
burial  to  sin,  and  a  resurrection  to  the  enjoy- 
ment of  spiritual  life,  not  performed  by  ivater^ 
but  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

And  now,  reader,  we  have  given  you  the  whole 
of  those  plain  facts  and  Scripture  assertions, 
upon  which  the  ultra  immersionist  relies  to  sus- 
tain his  doctrine.  If  the  passages  we  have  ex- 
amined do  not  prove  immersion,  it  cannot  be 
proved  from  the  Scriptures.  And  where  is  the 
evidence  in  these  ?  Is  it  in  the  fact  that  John 
baptized  in  Jordan  ?  No.  For  this  he  might 
have  done  by  pouring,  as  well  as  by  immersion. 
Is  it  found  in  the  "  much  water"  of  iEnon  ? 
7  N 


146  CAMFBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

No.  For  the  multitudes  would  have  needed 
much  water,  though  not  one  of  them  had  been 
baptized.  Nor  do  we  find  it  in  the  declaration 
that  "  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch  went  down 
into  the  water."  For  this  involves  the  absur- 
dity of  supposing  Philip  also  to  have  been  im- 
mersed. Nor  yet  do  we  find  it  in  the  words, 
*'  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death  ;"  be- 
cause death  is  woi  water.  Nor  in  the  passage 
from  Colossians  ;  for  if  that  implies  a  burial  in 
water,  nothing  but  a  miracle  could  save  every 
baptized  person  from  being  drowned.  But  the 
search  becomes  hopeless.  Not  one  of  these 
passages,  nor  all  of  them  together,  aflfords  any 
proof  that  immersion  was  the  primitive  mode 
of  baptism  ;  nor  does  the  New  Testament  give 
us  any  warrant  to  conclude,  with  certainty,  that 
the  apostles,  or  John  the  Baptist,  ever  immers- 
ed one  of  their  converts. 

In  prosecuting  this  subject,  we  have  now  ar- 
rived at  the  point  where  it  seems  expedient  to 
notice  the  other  side  of  the  question.  Our  in- 
quiry in  the  preceding  numbers,  has  been  for 
proofs  in  favor  of  immersion.  But  after  hav- 
ing traveled  over  all  the  ground,  and  examined 
with  candor  and  impartiality,  every  passage  in 
the  New  Testament  that  seems  to  have  a  favor- 
able bearing  on  that  view  of  the  subject,  to- 
gether with  the  original  meaning  of  the  word, 
we  find  the  question  still  involved  in  doubt  and 
uncertainty.  Not  one  ray  of  light  has  been 
discovered  to  offer  a  gleam  of  hope  that  the 
immersionist  will  ever  be  able  to  demonstrate 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  147 

his  system  to  accord  with  the  practice  of  the 
apostles  and  primitive  christians.  If  such  was 
their  practice,  the  Holy  Spirit  has  left  us  in  the 
dark — the  Scriptures  make  no  mention  of  the 
fact.  This,  being  the  case,  we  turn  to  the  oth- 
er side,  and  offer  some  reasons  why  we  believe 
in  and  practice  a  different  mode. 

In  the  remaining  cases  of  the  administration 
of  baptism,  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament, 
we  have,  at  least,  some  strong  presumptions 
against  the  doctrine  that  immersion  was  the 
primitive  practice.  The  first  persons  baptized 
after  the  apostles  received  their  commission  to 
teach  and  disciple  the  nations,  were  the  three 
thousand  upon  the  day  of  Pentecost.  It  was 
the  third,  or  according  to  our  method  of  com- 
putation, the  ninth  hour  of  the  day,  when  Pe- 
ter began  to  preach ;  and  after  he  had  preached, 
and  heard  the  cry  of  the  convicted  multitude, 
and  responded  to  their  inquiry,  he  then  exhorted 
them  "  with  many  other  words."  Now,  all 
this  probably  brought  twelve  or  one  o'clock  ; 
and  during  the  five  or  six  hours  that  remained 
of  the  day,  three  thousand  persons  were  bap- 
tized by  twelve  men,  making  two  hundred  and 
fifty  to  each.  To  suppose  that  one  man,  in  so 
short  a  time,  could  go  through  the  ordinary 
forms,  and  immerse  this  number  of  persons,  is 
to  suppose  a  moral,  and  we  believe,  a  physical 
impossibility.  To  avoid  this  insuperable  diffi- 
culty, some  have  imagined  that  the  seventy  dis- 
ciples were  present,  and  took  part  in  the  work 
of  baptizing  ;  and  in  addition  to  this,  the  Camp- 


148  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

bellite  would  tell  us  that  the  converts  them- 
selves, so  soon  as  they  were  baptized,  were 
prepared  to  become  baptizers,  and  thus  to  re- 
lieve the  apostles  of  their  burden.  But  we 
might  fancy  fifty  other  things  on  as  good  au- 
thority, and  with  as  much  probability  as  either 
of  these.  The  account  mentions  Peter  and 
*'  the  eleven,"  but  says  not  one  word  about  the 
seventy ;  and  as  to  the  notion  that  every  man 
who  is  initiated  into  the  church  by  baptism,  is 
authorized  to  administer  the  ordinance,  it  has, 
like  most  of  the  other  peculiarities  of  Camp- 
bellism,  no  more  countenance  in  the  Word  of 
God,  than  the  flimsy  impostures  of  Joe  Smith, 
or  the  idolatrous  pretensions  of  Ann  Lee.  We 
have,  then,  no  reason  to  believe  that  any  but 
the  twelve  were  employed  in  baptizing  on  that 
occasion.  But  they  could  not  have  gone  in 
search  of  water  and  immersed  three  thousand 
persons  in  that  part  of  the  day  that  remained 
after  Peter's  sermon  and  exhortation ;  it  is 
therefore  extremely  improbable  that  there  was 
any  immersion  on  that  occasion. 

An  examination  of  the  circumstances  con- 
nected with  the  baptism  of  the  jailor  and  his 
family,  will  result  in  a  similar  conclusion.  Af- 
ter Paul  and  Silas  had  been  beaten  with  many 
stripes,  they  were  "cast  into  prison;"  when 
the  jailor,  being  charged  "  to  keep  them  safe- 
ly," of  his  own  accord,  "  thrust  them  into  the 
inner  prison,  and  made  their  feet  fast  in  the 
stocks."  Here,  let  it  be  observed,  two  apart- 
ments  are   mentioned.     The  magistrates  cast 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  149 

them  into  prison,  but  the  jailor  thrust  them 
into  the  inner  prison.  While  here,  Jehovah 
undertook  their  cause,  and  at  midnight  sent  an 
earthquake  that  shook  the  prison  to  its  founda- 
tions, opened  its  doors,  loosed  the  fetters  of  the 
prisoners,  and  waked  the  keeper  ;  who  seeing 
the  doors  open,  concluded  the  prisoners  had 
escaped,  and  was  about  to  kill  himself.  But 
when  Paul  cried  out,  "  Do  thyself  no  harm,  for 
we  are  all  here,"  the  jailor  called  for  a  light, 
sprang  in,  fell  down  before  Paul  and  Silas, 
brought  them  out,  and  inquired,  "  What  must 
I  do  to  be  saved  ?"  And  the  same  hour,  he 
and  his,  were  baptized ;  and  he  brought  the  pris- 
oners into  his  house,  and  "  set  meat  before 
them."  These  are  the  material  incidents  re- 
corded of  this  transaction,  and  if  they  do  not 
forbid  the  supposition  that  the  jailor  and  his 
family  were  immersed,  we  are  greatly  mistaken. 
We  are  aware  it  is  assumed  by  the  immer- 
sionist,  that  the  mention  made  of  the  jail- 
or's bringing  Paul  and  his  companion  out, 
and  taking  them  into  his  house,  is  proof  that 
they  went  out  of  the  prison  in  search  of  water; 
but  this  is  a  supposition  destitute  of  proof, 
and  utterly  opposed  to  the  recorded  facts  and 
rational  probabilities  of  the  case.  It  has  been 
already  observed  that  the  prison  had  two  apart- 
ments— for  Paul  and  Silas,  after  they  were  in 
prison,  were  thrown  into  the  inner  prison.  It 
is  also  clear  that  the  jailor's  house  was  so 
connected  with  the  prison  as  to  form  a  part  of 
the  same  building — because  the  first  thing  he 
n2 


150  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

saw  on  awaking  out  of  his  sleep,  was  the  pris- 
on doors  open,  which  he  could  not  have  seen 
had  he  lodged  in  a  different  house.  Nor  could 
he  have  sprung  into  the  inner  prison^  as  rep- 
resented, unless  he  liad  occupied  an  adjoining 
apartment.  Having  premised  this,  we  are  pre- 
pared, without  leaving  the  prison,  to  follow  the 
apostle  when  "  brought  out"  and  conducted  into 
the  house  of  the  keeper.  He  was  brought  out 
of  the  inner  prison  into  that  apartment  in  which 
he  had  at  first  been  cast,  and  from  thence  into 
the  keeper's  house,  which  was  under  the  same 
roof,  and  a  part  of  the  prison.  Add  to  this, 
that  after  the  events  of  the  night  are  detailed, 
the  history  leaves  Paul  and  Silas  in  the  house 
of  the  jailor,  where  in  all  probability  they  re- 
mained the  balance  of  the  night  with  their  new 
converts  ;  but  in  the  morning  we  find  them  still 
in  prison,  refusing  to  leave  it  until  the  magis- 
trates shall  come  and  take  them  out  as  openly 
as  they  had  cast  them  in.  The  obvious  conclu- 
sion from  this,  is,  that  the  keeper's  house  and 
the  prison  were  synonymous. 

But  further — the  jailor  by  virtue  of  his  of- 
fice might  assign  the  prisoners  any  part  of  the 
prison  whicli  he  considered  most  suitable  ;  but 
out  of  it  he  could  not  take  them,  without  be- 
traying his  trust,  and  violating  the  authority 
under  which  he  acted.  And  certainly  we  can- 
not suppose  this  of  a  public  functionary,  in  en- 
tering upon  the  duties  of  that  religion  which 
teaches  subjection  to  "  the  powers  that  be." 
Nor  is  this  all.     The  supposition  that  he  had 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  151 

gone  out  to  baptize  the  jailor  and  his  family 
during  the  night,  is  wholly  irreconcilable  with 
the  apostle's  reply  to  the  magistrates  in  the 
morning.  When  they  sent  word  to  the  jailor 
to  let  the  men  go,  Paul  replied,  substantially, 
we  are  here  in  jyrison,  where  they  cast  us 
openly,  though  we  had  committed  no  fault, 
"  and  do  they  now  thrust  us  out  privily  ?  Nay, 
verily,"  we  will  not  go  out  thus,  "  but  let  them 
come  themselves  2.\\&  fetch  us  out.''''  Thus  he 
manifested  a  consciousness  of  the  rectitude  of 
his  own  conduct,  and  an  acute  sense  of  fitness 
and  propriety.  "  They  cast  us  in  prison  with- 
out sufficient  cause,  and  in  prison  will  we  re- 
main until  they  come  and  take  us  out."  But 
how  does  this  noble  daring,  in  refusing  to  leave 
the  prison  till  brought  out  by  those  who  had 
cast  him  in,  comport  with  the  idea  that  he  had 
previously  been  out  to  immerse  the  jailor  ? 
Just  about  as  well  as  light  agrees  with  dark- 
ness, or  the  Bible  with  Campbellism.  Such  a 
supposition  charges  St.  Paul  with  a  duplicity 
unworthy  his  character — a  hypocrisy  entirely 
repugnant  to  the  principles  of  that  religion  for 
which  he  laid  down  his  life.  The  apostle, 
then,  did  not  leave  the  prison  during  the  night. 
Hence,  the  jailor  and  his  family  were  baptized 
in  the  prison;  and,  consequently,  they  loere 
not  baptized  by  immersion.  V^-q  can  come  to 
to  no  other  conclusion,  unless  we  charge  the 
apostle  with  sheer  hypocrisy,  and  imagine  an 
event  that  has  not  even  the  most  improbable 
of  probabilities  for  its  support. 


152  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

Another  example,  and  perhaps  the  last  one 
we  shall  adduce,  is  the  baptism  of  St.  Paul. 
The  history  of  his  case  makes  it  clear  that  he 
was  baptized  in  a  house,  and  in  an  erect,  or 
standing  position  ;  and  if  so,  he  could  not  have 
been  immersed.     But  let  us  look  at  the  facts. 

In  his  journey  to  Damascus,  Saul  of  Tarsus 
was  arrested  by  the  power  of  God,  deprived  of 
his  sight,  and  in  that  condition  conducted  into 
the  city,  to  the  house  of  one  Judas,  where  he 
continued  three  days  without  seeing  any  thing, 
or  tasting  food.  In  the  mean  time  the  Lord 
commanded  Ananias  to  go  to  him,  who,  "  went 
his  way,  entered  into  the  house,"  laid  his  hands 
upon  Saul,  and  addressed  him  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  ;  "  and  immediately  there  fell 
from  his  eyes  as  if  it  had  been  scales,  and  he 
received  sight  forthwith,  and  arose  and  was 
baptized."  These  are  the  facts  narrated  by  the 
inspired  writer ;  and  so  far  from  holding  out 
the  idea  of  his  leaving  the  house  to  be  immersed, 
they  plainly  teach  the  contrary.  Every  un- 
prejudiced mind,  upon  reading  the  account,  will 
conclude  that  Paul  was  baptized  in  the  house 
where  he  received  his  sight.  In  confirmation 
of  this,  let  it  be  observed,  that  through  the 
whole  narrative,  when  it  was  necessary  for  the 
persons  concerned  to  travel,  or  pass  from  one 
place  to  another,  the  fact  of  their  doing  so  is 
mentioned.  For  instance,  it  is  said  that  Paul 
'■^journeyed''''  to  Damascus,  and  when  he  was 
struck  down  by  the  way,  that  the  voice  said  to 
him,  *'  Arise  and  g*©;"  and  that  he  arose,  and 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  153 

•*  they  led  him  by  the  hand,  and  brought  him 
into  Damascus."  Then  the  Lord  said  to  Ana- 
nias, "  Arise  and  go  into  the  street  that  is  called 
Straight,"  and  he  ^^ivent  his  way,  and  entered 
into  the  house."  But  when  he  came,  he  did 
not  say  to  Saul,  arise  and  go  to  the  water,  as 
in  the  other  cases,  and  which  in  all  probability 
he  would  have  said,  if  such  a  movement  had 
been  necessary.  His  language  was,  "  Arise 
and  be  baptized  ;"  and  the  account  adds  that 
Saul  "  arose  and  was  baptized."  If  all  these 
circumstances  do  not  establish  beyond  reasona- 
ble doubt,  that  Saul  did  not  leave  the  house  till 
after  his  baptism,  we  can  scarcely  conceive  it 
possible  that  any  fact  can  be  established  by  cir- 
cumstantial evidence. 

But  in  addition  to  his  being  in  a  house,  we 
have  conclusive  proof  that  the  apostle  was 
baptized  standing  on  his  feet.  In  an  able  criti- 
cism on  this  passage,  by  Dr.  Cleland  of  Ken- 
tucky, it  is  clearly  demonstrated  that  the  verb 
ANA.STAS,  used  to  denote  Paul's  rising  up,  in 
order  to  be  baptized,  could  do  no  more  than 
place  him  on  his  feet,  and  that  it  properly  sig- 
nifies, he  stood  up.  Every  scholar  knows  that 
the  New  Testament  uses  it  in  this  sense;  or,  at 
least,  he  may  know  it  if  he  will  examine.  We 
give  one  example.  It  is  written,  Mark,  xiv. 
60:  "  And  the  high  priest  stood  up  [anastas] 
in  the  midst,  and  asked  Jesus,"  &c.  Now,  if 
anastas  signifies  that  the  high  priest  "  stood 
up,"  it  must  signify  the  same  of  Saul ;  and 
hence  we  have  indubitable  evidence  that  he  was 
7  * 


154  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

baptized  standing  on  his  feet,  in  an  erect  pos- 
ture. Add  to  this,  that  he  was  baptized  in  a 
private  house — for  no  person  from  reading  the 
history  of  the  case,  can  come  to  any  other  con- 
clusion ;  and  he  who  still  imagines  he  was  im- 
mersed, must  be  more  anxious  to  sustain  a  fa- 
vorite theory,  than  to  submit  to  the  testimony 
of  the  Bible.  To  talk  of  immersion  performed 
in  a  private  house,  is,  indeed,  sufficiently  ri- 
diculous ;  but  to  add  to  this,  that  the  subject 
was  immersed  while  standing  on  his  feet,  caps 
the  climax  of  absurdity  and  impossibility. 

We  have  now  examined  three  cases  of  bap- 
tism taken  from  the  New  Testament,  in  which 
the  presumption  against  immersion  is  so  strong 
as  to  amount  almost  to  an  absolute  certainty. 
The  case  of  Cornelius  and  his  friends,  is  simi- 
lar in  its  character.  It  contains  nothing  favora- 
ble to  immersion.  Its  probabilities  lie  entirely 
against  that  practice.  It  is  not  pretended  that 
these  circumstances  prove  what  the  primitive 
mode  of  baptism  was  ;  but  they  certainly  prove 
that  it  was  not  immersion.  In  the  absence, 
then,  of  any  proof  that  either  John  the  Baptist, 
or  the  apostles,  immersed  one  of  their  converts, 
and  with  the  certain  knowledge  that  some  of 
them  were  baptized  under  circumstances  tliat 
rendered  their  immersion  impossible,  we  can- 
not resist  the  belief  that  the  primitive  christians 
were  baptized  by  j)Oiiring  or  sprinMiiig. 

Before  we  close  the  present  number,  we  will 
briefly  touch  a  few  other  considerations  that  stand 
opposed  to  the  exclusive  immersion  practice. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  155 

1.  If  God  had  intended  that  immersion,  and 
it  alone,  should  be  the  mode  of  baptism  for  his 
church,  it  is  sm-ely  probable  he  would  have 
commanded  it,  and  in  terms  so  explicit  that 
none  could  doubt.  But  this  is  not  the  case. 
The  Scriptures  nowhere  command  it,  nor  do 
they  give  us  any  assurance  that  the  apostles 
practiced  it  in  one  single  instance. 

2.  If  the  persons   baptized  by  the  apostles 
were  immersed,  it  is  quite  likely  that  the  in- 
spired writers  in  detailing  the   circumstances, 
would  have  added   something  about  their  ad- 
journing to  some  river  or  pond  in  search  of 
water.     Indeed,  upon  the  immersion    theory, 
we  can  scarcely  conceive  it  possible  that  among 
all  the  cases  of  baptism   recorded  in  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  no  mention   should  be   made 
of  their  going  to,  or  being  at  some   stream  or 
fountain.     But  the  accounts  give  no  intimation 
of  any  thing  of  this  nature.     Among  all  the 
persons  therein  mentioned,  the  eunuch  is  the 
only  one  said  to  have  been  baptized  at  a  stream 
or  spring,  and  this  was  a  mere  casual  circum- 
stance.    While  pursuing  his  journey,  he  heard 
the  sermon  under  which  he  was  converted,  and 
was  then  baptized  with  the  first  water  he  found 
on  the  way.     He  did  not  go  there  in  search  of 
a  suitable  place  to  receive  the  ordinance  ;   nor 
is  there  the  least  hint  of  such  a  procedure  in 
any  other  case.     Wherever  the  meeting  was 
held,  and  in  whatever  place  sinners  professed 
faith  in   Christ,  there,  and  immediately,  were 
they  baptized.     No  delay,  in  order  to  prepare 


156  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

suitable  apparel — no  retiring  from  the  place 
where  converts  were  made,  in  search  of  suita- 
ble and  sufficient  water  is  mentioned ;  but  on 
the  contrary,  the  facts,  as  given  to  us,  convey 
no  other  idea,  than  that  each  was  baptized  forth- 
with, and  in  the  very  house  where  he  heard  and 
believed  the  gospel. 

3.  If  the  efficacy  of  baptism  depends  more 
upon  the  frame  or  state  of  mind  in  which  it  is 
received,  than  upon  any  external  circumstance, 
it  is  not  probable  that  a  mode  unfavorable  to  de- 
votional   exercises  would  be  required.     That 
baptism  does  require  this  state  of  mind,  is  ad- 
mitted, even  by  Mr.  Campbell ;  for  he  insists 
that  the  subject  must  have  failh,  or  his  baptism 
will  not  avail.     "If  he  believe  not  the  gospel, 
he  is,  to  speak  after  the  manner  of  men,  still- 
born."    So  says  the  oracle  of  Bethany  ;  and 
in  this  he  concedes  that  baptism  in  order  to  be 
effectual,  must  be   received  when  the  mind  is 
properly   exercised.      But   immersion,    in    its 
practice,  is  wholly  unfavorable  to  the  exercise 
of  that  faith  which  takes  hold  upon  the  Savior. 
It  often  produces  shivering,  sobbing,  and  other 
unpleasant   sensations,  that  must  distract  the 
thoughts,  and  entirely  unfit  the  mind  for  a  col- 
lected performance  of  a  solemn  act  of  devotion. 
4.  It  is  not  probable  that  a  religion  designed 
to  be  universal,  would  require  any  thing  that  is 
not  practicable  in  all  countrj- .s,  and  under  all 
circumstances.     But  immersion  is  neither.    In 
the  higher  latitudes,  and  at  times  in  the  tem- 
perate, the  cold  is  so  intense  that  it  cannot  be 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  157 

performed ;  and  often  in  the  case  of  sick  and 
delicate  persons,  its  practice  is  wholly  inadmis- 
sible. Indeed,  with  all  the  caution  that  is  used, 
the  loss  both  of  health,  and  of  life,  has  some- 
times occurred. 

And,  finally,  it  is  extremely  improbable  that 
a  religion  whose  nature  is  purity  and  holiness, 
should  have  enjoined  the  performance  of  any 
thing  indelicate.  But  the  immersion  of  wo- 
men by  men,  and  in  the  presence  of  crowds  of 
men,  is,  to  say  the  least  of  it,  of  questionable 
propriety.  With  all  the  arrangements  of  mod- 
ern times,  in  providing  changes  of  dress,  and 
suitable  apparel,  so  as  to  give  the  least  possi- 
ble offence  to  delicacy,  immersion  is  not  a  de- 
cent practice.  We  have  no  recollection  ever 
to  have  witnessed  the  performance  of  it,  where 
females  were  concerned,  without  having  ocu- 
lar demonstration  of  the  truth  of  what  we  as- 
sert ;  and  it  is  doubted  whether,  with  all  the 
advantages  of  fit  apparel  and  modern  regula- 
tions, any  female  submits  to  it  who  has  not  a 
previous  struggle  with  her  delicacy.  To  sup- 
pose, then,  that  the  apostles,  at  a  time  when  no 
such  accommodations  could  be  had,  were  con- 
stantly, wherever  they  went,  immersing  men 
and  women,  in  pools  and  rivers,  in  the  pres- 
ence of  many  spectators,  and  they,  sometimes, 
unbelievers,  is  more  than  rational  credulity  can 
submit  to. 

From  all  which,  we  conclude,  and  it  is  our 
firm  belief,  that  immersion  was  neither  com- 
manded by  the  Savior,  nor  practiced  by  the 
O 


158  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

apostles ;  but  originated  in  the  efforts  of  men, 
who  vainly  thought  they  could  improve  the  or- 
dinances, and  mend  the  institutions  of  the 
church. 

In  addition  to  the  presumptions  and  strong 
probabilities  against  the  immersion  theory  pre- 
sented in  our  last,  we  would  now  offer  an  argu- 
ment of  a  different  character,  and  one  which  in 
our  judgment  is  conclusive  in  favor  of  asper- 
sion or  pouring.  We  refer  to  the  mode  of  bap- 
tizing when  Jesus  Christ  was  the  administrator. 
It  is  true  he  did  not  administer  the  baptism  of 
water  ;  but  there  is  another  baptism  recognized 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  which,  though  ejected 
by  the  deformed  and  spurious  Christianity  of 
Mr.  Campbell's  creed,  is  far  more  essential 
than  any  outward  ordinance.  When  this  bap- 
tism is  to  be  performed,  the  Savior  himself  be- 
comes the  administrator,  by  pouring  out,  or 
shedding  forth  his  Spirit  upon  the  subject ;  and 
thus,  by  example,  instructing  his  ambassadors 
how  to  proceed  in  administering  the  baptism 
of  water.  We  do  not  suppose  that  this  fact 
will  have  the  same  effect  upon  the  minds  of  all 
others  that  it  has  upon  ours  ;  nor  are  we  dis- 
posed to  censure  either  the  head  or  heart  of 
him  who  shall  still  adhere  to  immersion.  But 
to  us,  the  circumstance  mentioned  is  entirely 
conclusive,  and  seems  sufficient  to  put  this  long 
disputed  subject  for  ever  at  rest.  The  New 
Testament  contains  no  evidence  that  baptism, 
in  any  instance,  was  administered  by  immer- 
sion ;  but  it  records  many  cases  of  baptism  by 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  159 

pouring.  The  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
which  every  christian  must  receive,  is  uniform- 
ly represented  as  being  performed  in  this  man- 
ner ;  and  believing  this  circumstance  to  throw 
more  light  on  the  primitive  mode  of  baptism  than 
any  thing  else  found  in  the  tScriptures,  we  will 
devote  particular  attention  to  its  examination. 

But  that  the  argument  about  to  be  presented 
may  be  understood  in  its  full  force,  it  will  be 
necessary,  first,  to  consider  the  object  or  design 
of  baptism,  so  far  as  its  representative  or  sym- 
bolic character  is  concerned. 

As  a  religious  ordinance,  baptism  is  a  sign 
of  regeneration,  pointing  out  the  cleansing  of 
the  soul  from  the  pollution  of  sin,  by  the  bap- 
tism of  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  proof  that  this 
work  in  the  soul  is  ascribed  to  the  Spirit,  the 
Scriptures  are  clear  and  decisive.  Let  one  pas- 
sage suffice.  Paul  says  to  the  Corinthians, 
"  But  ye  are  washed,  but  ye  are  sanctified,  but 
ye  are  justified,  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus, 
and  by  the  Spirit  of  our  Gociy — 1  Cor.  vi,  11. 
Here  the  justification  and  sanctification  of  the 
believer  are  unequivocally  declared  to  be  effect- 
ed "by  the  Spirit  of  our  God  ;"  and  it  is  equal- 
ly clear  that  the  same  Divine  authority,  deno- 
minates this  work  a  baptism  ;  "for  by  one 
Spirit,"  says  the  apostle  in  the  same  epistle, 
"  are  we  all  baptized  into  one  body.''  This  is 
the  baptism  which  constitutes  us  strictly  and 
properly  the  disciples  of  Christ ;  and  the  bap- 
tism of  water,  by  which  we  are  externally  and 
nominally  set  apart  for  his  service,  is  the  sym- 


160  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

bol  of  the  other — representing  the  baptism  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  by  which  we  are  made,  in  re- 
ality, "  new  creatures."  In  the  natural  world, 
water  is  used  to  purify  or  cleanse  from  external 
defilement ;  and  hence  the  propriety  of  using 
it,  in  baptism,  to  signify  the  work  of  the  Spirit, 
which  cleanses  the  soul  from  the  pollution 
of  sin. 

This  natural  meaning  of  the  ordinance  is  ob- 
viously to  he  inferred  from  the  Word  of  God. 
The  baptism  of  John  had  special  reference  to 
that  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  was  to  be  admin- 
istered by  Christ,  who  should  come  after  him  ; 
hence,  while  he  was  baptizi?ig  with  water,  he 
directed  them  to  believe  in  the  Messiah,  who 
should  baptize  them  "  with  the  IIoli/  Ghost 
and  with  fire."  For  this  reason,  we  find  the 
apostles  frequently  mentioning  baptism  in  con- 
nection with  the  "  gift"  and  influences  of  the 
Spirit ;  and,  hence,  also,  the  language  of  the 
Savior  to  Nicodemus  :  "  Except  a  man  be  born 
of  ivafer  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  God."  Here  we  have  the  bap- 
tism of  water  so  connected  with  the  Spirit,  in 
relation  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  as  fully  to 
warrant  the  conclusion  that  the  former  is 
intended  to  represent  the  latter.  To  be  bap- 
tized with  water,  is  to  enter  formally  into 
God's  visible  kingdom  ;  to  be  baptized  with  ' 
the  Spirit,  is  to  enter  into  his  spiritual  or  ' 
invisible  kingdom.  And  as  circumcision,  under  • 
the  old  dispensation,  was  a  sign  of  the  cir- 
cumcision   of  the    heart;    so   baptism,  under  * 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  161 

the  new,  is  significant  of  the  baptism  of  the 
Holy  Spirit. 

Other  and  stronger  arguments  might  be  ad- 
duced ;  but  to  enter  fully  into  this  subject  was 
not  our  design,  nor  would  it  comport  with  our 
limks.  The  considerations  already  presented 
must,  therefore,  suffice.  But  before  we  proceed, 
it  may  be  necessary  to  notice  another  opinion 
in  relation  to  this  subject. 

It  is  generally  believed  by  the  advocates  of 
immersion,  that  baptism  represents  the  death, 
burial,  and  resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  This  opinion,  in  addition  to  its  total 
jack  of  Scripture  for  its  support,  is  liable  to 
other  serious  objections.  The  New  Testament 
recognizes  but  two  rites  or  sacraments,  baptism 
and  the  Lord's  supper,  as  binding  upon  chris- 
tians. The  Lord's  supper  is  a  memorial  of  the 
sufferings  and  death  of  Christ,  in  the  work  of 
redemption.  "  As  oft  as  ye  eat  this  bread,  and 
drink  this  cup,  ye  do  show  the  Lord''s  death 
till  he  come."  It  is  certainly  not  reasonable 
to  suppose  that  baptism  is  significant  of  the 
same  thing.  We  can  see  no  use  in  having  two 
rites  to  represent  the  same  transaction,  even  if 
they  were  somewhat  similar  in  character  ;  but 
when  we  consider  the  vast  dissimilarity  be- 
tween baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper — that  the 
elements  of  the  one  is  water,  and  of  the  other 
bread  and  wine — that  the  former  is  to  be  ad- 
ministered but  once  to  the  same  individual,  and 
the  latter  to  be  frequently  repeated — it  is  the 
height  of  absurdity  to  imagine  that  both  are 
02 


162  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

emblematic  of  the  same  event.  As  one  of  these 
ordinances  certainly  points  out  what  Christ  did 
for  us,  in  dying  for  our  sins,  and  rising  for  our 
justification,  it  is  quite  reasonable  to  conclude 
that  the  other  represents  what  he  does  in  us, 
by  his  Spirit,  in  purifying  to  himself  a  peculiar 
people.  To  suppose  both  sacraments  to  be 
significant  of  the  former,  while  the  latter  has 
no  representative,  involves  a  manifest  absurdity. 
From  all  these  considerations,  it  is  obvious  that 
the  great  use  of  the  baptism  of  water,  is  to  re- 
present the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and 
as  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  supper  to  signi- 
fy the  work  of  regeneration,  would  be  a  plain 
perversion  of  that  ordinance,  it  follows  that  bap- 
tism, when  administered  to  represent  the  death 
of  Christ,  is  also  a  perversion. 

And,  now,  having  seen  that  water  baptism  is 
an  emblem  of  spiritual  baptism,  we  proceed  to 
present  the  argument  mentioned  in  the  first  par- 
agraph of  this  number,  drawn  from  the  fact  that 
the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  was  always  administer- 
ed by  pouring.  The  poun'ng  out  of  the  Spirit 
is,  in  the  language  of  Scripture,  uniformly  call- 
ed baptism ;  the  inference  is,  therefore,  irresisti- 
ble, that  the  pouring  of  water,  is  also  baptism  ; 
and  this  inference  assumes  the  form  of  certain- 
ty, when  we  consider  that  the  ordinance  of  bap- 
tism is  an  emblem  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit. 

To  evade  the  force  of  this  argument,  some 
have  assumed  that  the  Scriptures  only  mention 
the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  in  a  figurative  sense, 
and  hence  they  conclude  that  it  can  prove  noth- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  163 

ing  concerning  the  mode.  We  once  heard  a 
teacher,  who  is  considered  a  modern  Hercules, 
on  account  of  his  zeal  for  the  destruction  of 
those  serpents — creeds  and  sectarianism — and 
his  labors  to  spread  the  gospel  of  A.  Campbell, 
descant  nearly  an  hour  on  this  point.  He  stat- 
ed that  our  language  was  necessarily  figurative  ; 
because  we  have  more  ideas  than  words.  This 
discovery  of  the  numerical  preponderance  of 
ideas  over  words,  whether  original  with  him, 
or  learned  from  Mr.  Campbell,  was  entirely  new 
to  us;  and  as  the  English  language  contains 
about  seventy  thousand  words,  we  were  quite 
puzzled  to  conjecture  how  the  discovery  had 
been  made,  that  English  men  possess  more  than 
that  number  of  ideas.  The  truth  of  the  dis- 
covery, however,  seemed  somewhat  problem- 
atical, especially  in  relation  to  the  speaker 
himself;  for  though  he  appeared  to  have  plenty 
of  words,  and  even  to  understand  the  art  of 
manufacturing  new  ones  when  necessary,  his 
ideas  were  neither  numerous  nor  brilliant.  But 
whether  true  or  false,  it  answered  his  purpose, 
which  was  to  show,  what  no  one  doubts,  that 
there  is  such  a  thing  as  a  figurative  use  of  lan- 
guage ;  and  hence  he  took  occasion  to  assert 
that  when  the  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit  is  call- 
ed a  baptism,  the  term  is  used  in  a  figurative 
sense,  and  consequently  can  have  no  weight  in 
determining  the  mode  of  administering  the  bap- 
tism of  water. 

But  this  was  a  mistake.     The  conclusion  is 
not  warranted  by  the  premises  assumed.  When 


164  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

figures  are  introduced  they  must  have  some  re- 
semblance to  the  thing  signified.  Figuratively, 
we  say  a  man  is  immersed  in  debt.  This 
does  not  mean,  it  is  true,  that  he  is  literally 
covered  with  debts  ;  but  it  does  mean  that  his 
debts  are  so  numerous  as  to  cover  the  val- 
ue of  his  property ;  and  hence  immersion  is  a 
fit  representation  of  his  situation.  Again;  a 
painter  draws  the  figure  of  a  house,  and  though 
he  does  not  intend  it  to  be  literally  a  house,  he 
intends  it  to  be  as  much  like  one  as  possible. 
And  so  of  all  figures,  and  figurative  language. 
Unless  the  figure  bears  some  resemblance  to 
the  thing  signified,  it  can  in  no  proper  sense 
be  said  to  be  its  figure  ;  and,  therefore,  the  fig- 
ure of  baptism,  whatever  it  may  be,  must  re- 
semble baptism. 

Now  it  matters  not  for  our  present  purpose, 
whether  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost  be  de- 
nominated baptism,  in  a  figurative  sense,  or 
whether  the  baptism  of  water  be  designed  to 
represent  that  circumstance.  In  either  case,  the 
conclusion  is  the  same  ;  for  the  figure  must 
have  some  similarity  to  the  thing  signified. 
Every  Bible  reader  knows  that  the  pouring  out, 
or  falling  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  the  people, 
is  called  baptism.  If  the  term  here  be  used 
only  figuratively,  it  follows  that  the  action  to 
which  it  is  applied,  resembles  the  ordinance 
from  which  the  figure  is  derived ;  and  if  the 
rite  of  baptism  be  considered  as  a  symbol  of 
the  descent  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  will  not  vary 
the  result.     Either  way  the  resemblance  must 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  165 

exist.  But  where  is  the  resemblance  between 
immersion  and  the  baptism,  or  pouring  out  of 
the  Spirit  ?  It  cannot  be  found,  for  it  has  no 
existence.  Immersion,  therefore,  in  this  res- 
pect, wholly  destroys  the  significancy  of  bap- 
tism, and  renders  it  an  unmeaning  ceremony  ; 
while  pouring  retains  the  analogy  between  the 
sign  and  the  thing  signified,  and  is  clearly  em- 
blematic of  the  washing  away  of  the  guilt  and 
pollution  of  sin  by  the  pouring  out  of  the  Holy 
Spirit — the  only  thing  of  which  the  Scriptures 
make  baptism  an  emblem. 

We  will  now  present  the  argument  more  in 
detail,  by  noticing  a  few  passages  of  Scripture 
that  are  directly  in  point.  When  John  was 
baptizing  in  Jordan  he  said,  "  I  indeed  baptize 
you  with  water ;  but  he  that  cometh  after  me 
shall  baptize  you  ivith  the  Holy  Ghost  and 
with  fire."  Similar  to  this  is  the  language  of 
the  Savior  to  his  disciples,  recorded,  Acts,  i.  5  : 
*'  John  truly  baptized  with  water,  but  ye  shall 
be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many 
days  hence."  In  both  of  these  passages  the 
term  baptism  is  applied  to  the  giving  of  the 
Spirit,  as  clearly  as  it  is  applied  to  the  ordi- 
nance which  John  administered  ;  and  as  these 
two  pass  under  the  same  name,  the  best  method 
of  determining  the  proper  mode  of  administer- 
ing the  ordinance,  is  to  ascertain  in  what  man- 
ner the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  described 
in  Scripture.  This  is  certainly  a  correct  course. 
Two  actions  are  called  by  the  same  name — we 
have  no  certain  knowledge  of  the  manner  of 


166  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

the  performance  of  the  first ;  if  therefore,  we 
can  discover  how  the  second  was  done,  it  must 
be  decisive  in  determining  the  mode  of  the 
other. 

And  here  we  are  not  left  in  the  dark.  The 
Scriptures  tell  us  in  the  most  positive  manner 
that  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  was  administered 
by  pouring  out.,  or  falling  upon.  In  the  his- 
tory of  the  fulfillment  of  the  prophecy,  that 
Jesus  should  "baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  with  fire,"  we  have  not  only  the  fact  that 
he  did  baptize  his  disciples,  but,  also,  the  most 
unquestionable  proof  that  that  baptism  was  by 
pouring.  This  event  is  recorded  in  the  2d 
chapter  of  Acts,  where  it  is  said,  "  And  there 
appeared  unto  them  cloven  tongues  like  as  of 
fire,  and  it  sat  upon  each  of  them  ;  and  they 
were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost.''''  And 
Peter  stood  up  in  the  midst  and  said,  "  This  is 
that  which  was  spoken  by  the  prophet  Joel,  and 
it  shall  come  to  pass  in  the  last  days,  saith  God, 
I  will  pour  out  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh." 
That  this  was  the  fulfillment  of  the  prophecy 
of  John  the  Baptist,  and  of  the  promise  of  the 
Savior,  concerning  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  is  rendered  entirely  certain  by  the  lan- 
guage of  Peter  on  another  occasion.  When 
giving  an  account  of  his  visit  to  Cornelius,  he 
says,  "  And  as  I  began  to  speak,  the  Holy 
Ghost  fell  on  them,  as  on  us  at  the  beginning. 
Then  remembered  I  the  word  of  the  Lord,  how 
he  said,  John  indeed  baptized  with  water;  but 
ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  167 

Acts,  xi.  15,  16.  Two  things  are  plainly  taught 
in  this  passage.      1.  When  the  Holy  Ghost  fell 
on  Peter's  hearers,  he  considered  it  baptism  ; 
for  it  caused  him  to  remember  the  word  of  the 
Lord,  "  Ye  shall  be  baptized  with   the  Holy 
Ghost."     2.  When  he   says    that   the   Spirit 
"/eZZ  on  them,  as  on  us  at  the   beginning,^' 
he  evidently  refers  back  to  Pentecost ;  and  by 
alluding  to  the  promise  the  Savior  had  given,  to 
baptize  them  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  proves  that 
that  promise  was   then   fulfilled.     This,  then, 
by  the  Savior,  and  by  his  forerunner  John,  was 
called   baptism.     But  Joel  prophesied  that  it 
should  be  administered  by  pouring,  and  Peter 
tells  us  it  was  administered  in  this  mode.     It 
is,  therefore,  a  settled  point,  that  the  baptism 
of  the  Spirit  was  b.  pouring  out — 3.  descent  upon, 
and   not  an  iminersion  into.     But   the  same 
word  that  here  implies  pouring,  is  used  to  de- 
note the  ordinance  ;  and  hence  it  is  certain  that 
baptism  is  correctly  administered  by  pouring. 
"For  if  baptism,"  says  Mr.  Watson,  "neces- 
sarily means  immersion,  and   John  baptized 
by  immersion,  then  did  not  Jesus  baptize  his 
disciples   with   the    Holy  Ghost.     He   might 
bestow  it  upon  them,  but  he  did  not  baptize 
them  with  it,  according  to  the  immersionists, 
since  he  only  ^poured  it  upon  them,'  ^  shed  it 
upon  them,'  and  caused  it '  to  fall  upon  them  ;' 
none  of  which,  according  to  them,  is  baptism. 
It  follows,  therefore,  that  the  prediction  of  John 
was  never  fulfilled,  in  their  sense  of  baptizing; 
because,  none  of  the  disciples  of  Jesus  men- 


168  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

tioned  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  ever  received 
the  Holy  Ghost  but  by  affusion.  This  is  the 
dilemma  into  which  they  put  themselves.  They 
must  allow  that  baptism  is  not  in  this  passage 
used  for  immersion,  or  they  must  deny  that 
Jesus  ever  did  baptize  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
All  the  other  accounts  of  the  baptism  of  the 
Spirit  agree  as  to  the  mode,  with  that  which 
was  administered  by  the  Savior  on  the  day  of 
Pentecost.  They  all  represent  the  Spirit  as  com- 
ing from  above,  like  the  pouring  of  water  upon 
the  head.  When  our  Lord  received  this  bap- 
tism, the  Spirit  of  God  descended  like  a  dove, 
and  lighted  upon  him.  When  Cornelius  and 
those  that  were  with  him  received  the  same 
gift,  it  is  said,  "  the  Holy  Ghost  fell  on  them  ;" 
"  and  they  of  the  circumcision  that  believed, 
were  astonished,  because  that  on  the  Gentiles, 
also,  was  poured  out  the  gift  of  the  Holy 
Ghost ;"  and  when  St.  Paul  connects  the  two 
baptisms  in  a  manner  somewhat  similar  to  the 
words  of  John  the  Baptist,  and  our  Lord,  in 
the  passages  above  quoted,  he  expresses  the 
mode  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  in  the  same 
manner:  "which  he  shed  on  us  abundantly 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord."  Thus  it  is 
seen  that  that  baptism  which  the  Savior  ad- 
ministers, is  uniformly  administered  by  pouring ; 
and  as  the  baptism  which  we  are  commanded 
to  administer  is  a  symbol  of  the  other^'  and 
should  be  as  much  like  it  as  possible,  it  neces- 
sarily follows,  that  the  pouring  of  water  upon 
the  subject  is  the  correct  mode  of  baptism. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  1G9 

The  argument  is  now  before  our  readers. 
The  circumstances  under  which  we  have  writ- 
ten, have  caused  us  to  present  it  in  a  crude  and 
rather  desultory  manner;  we  will,  therefore, 
repeat  and  sum  up  the  whole  in  a  few  words. 

1.  Two  things  pertaining  to  Christianity,  and 
intimately  connected  in  the  Scriptures,  are  call- 
ed by  the  same  name — the  hapiUim  of  water, 
and  the  bcqitism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The 
Scriptures  do  not,  either  by  example  or  precept, 
inform  us  how  the  former  was  administered  ; 
but  they  tell  us  as  plainly  as  language  can,  that 
the  latter  was  always  administered  by  being 
poured  out,  or  shed  forth  on  the  subject;  it 
is  therefore  plain  that  the  water,  in  baptism, 
should  be  poured  w^ow  the  person  baptized. 

2.  It  has  been  shown  that  water  baptism  is  a 
symbol  or  sign  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit ;  con- 
sequently, there  must  be  some  resemblance  be- 
tween them.  But  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit  is  al- 
ways by  affusion  ;  it  is,  therefore,  certain  that 
water  baptism  should  be  administered  in  the 
same  way. 

3.  And,  finally,  as  there  is  no  proof  that  in 
any  instance  found  in  the  New  Testament,  bap- 
tism was  performed  by  immersion  ;  as  there 
are  so  many  presumptions  and  strong  proba- 
bilities against  that  practice,  as  have  been  sta- 
ted ;  and  as  we  have  decisive  evidence  of  a  de- 
signed correspondence  between  tlie  baptism, 
the  pouring  out  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  the 
baptism,  the  pouring  out  of  water,  we  may 
conclude  with  confidence,  that  the  latter  was  the 

8  P 


170  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

apostolic  mode  of  administering  that  ordinance. 

This  is  the  conclusion  at  which  we  have  arriv- 
ed ;  and  this  we  believe  to  be  a  true  and  necessa- 
ry conclusion  from  the  facts  we  have  laid  before 
the  reader.  Not  that  we  suppose  that  all  who 
may  read  our  remarks  will  be  led  to  think  as  we 
do.  We  know  human  nature  too  well  to  harbor 
such  a  thought.  But  we  do  most  firmly  believe, 
if  men  could  and  would  lay  aside  their  precon- 
ceived notions  in  favor  of  immersion,  and  come 
to  the  Bible  to  learn  the  truth,  "  as  they  that  must 
give  an  account"  forwhat  they  believe,  as  well  as 
for  what  they  do,  that  the  facts  presented  in  this 
number,  are  sufficient  to  settle  forever  this  ve- 
ry exciting  and  unprofitable  controversy. 

Before  we  said  any  thing  in  these  strictures 
concerning  the  mode  of  baptism,  we  had  prov- 
ed that  the  importance  Mr.  Campbell  attaches 
to  the  ordinance,  and  the  object  for  which  he 
administers  it,  are  anti-scriptural,  nearly  allied 
to  Popery,  and  dangerous  to  the  souls  of  his 
adherents  ;  and  now,  when  it  is  seen  that  his 
system  is  buLlt,  not  upon  the  ordinance,  pro- 
perly, but  upon  a  certain  mode  of  administer- 
ing it,  which  never  can  be  proved  to  accord 
with  the  primitive  practice,  both  he  and  his 
reformation  are  placed  in  an  attitude  by  no 
means  enviable.  Indeed,  when,  in  addition  to 
this,  we  consider  the  violence  with  which  he 
assails  the  christian  world,  the  impudence  with 
which  he  disclaims  sectarianism,  and  the  arro- 
gance he  manifests  in  claiming  for  himself  and 
his  followers  the   appellation  of  the   only  true 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  171 

church,  our  risible  powers  would  be  excited, 
were  it  not  for  the  superior  claims^upon  our  pi- 
ty and  our  prayers. 

Our  remarks  on  the  mode  of  baptism  are  now 
closed.  We  should  have  said  nothing  on  the 
subject,  but  for  the  arrogance  and  presumption 
of  Mr.  Campbell  and  his  partisans.  He  at  the 
outset  had  palmed  upon  the  public  a  spurious 
translation  of  the  New  Testament,  which  was 
designed  to  fix  the  mode,  by  giving  the  original 
a  translation  that  should  confine  it  to  immersion; 
then  to  sustain  the  unwarrantable  position  he 
had  indulged  in  assertions  equally  unwarranta- 
ble, and  wantonly  assailed  the  good  and  wise  of 
every  name,  who  refused  to  submit  to  his  dic- 
tation, till  many  of  the  ignorant  and  unstable 
had  really  concluded  immersion  to  be  necessary 
to  salvation.  This  reckless  course  gave  birth  to 
a  system  by  which  the  most  abandoned  sinners, 
by  a  sudden  pop  under  the  water,  and  without 
any  Divine  influence,  are  not  only  transformed 
into  angels  of  light,  but  have  their  mental  facul- 
ties so  illuminated  that  they  know  all  about  the 
Scriptures,  and  immediately  become  teachers 
and  expounders.  Hence  it  is  no  uncommon  oc- 
currence to  see  those  who  so  far  from  under- 
standing the  original,  do  not  know  enough  of 
their  mother  tongue  to  distinguish  between  the 
nominative  case  and  the  verb,  in  the  plainest 
sentence,  going  about  with  the  New  Testament 
and  the  Millennial  Harbinger,  endeavoring  to 
make  proselytes,  asserting  that  baptizo  always 
means  immersion,  and  with  the  most  unblush- 


172  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

ing  temerity,  sending  to  perdition  all  who  do 
not  follow  them  under  the  water.  Such  con- 
duct merits  little  but  contempt ;  and  should  have 
received  no  notice  from  us,  but  for  the  fact  that 
their  "great  swelling  words,"'  and  arrogant  as- 
sumptions, are  calculated  to  mislead  a  portion  of 
the  community,  and  thereby  to  endanger  im- 
mortal souls.  To  contribute  our  mite  in  coun- 
teracting those  evils,  was  our  motive  in  writing  ; 
and  for  this  purpose  only  have  we  concerned 
with  the  mode  of  baptism.  We  close  by  re- 
peating, that  neither  the  import  of  baptizo,  nor 
the  Word  of  God,  warrants  the  conclusion  that 
immersion  only  is  baptism  ;  and  hence  the  man 
who  says  to  his  neighbor,  "  you  must  be  im- 
mersed or  you  cannot  be  a  disciple  of  Christ," 
is  insincere  or  ignorant,  or  bigoted,  or  influenc- 
ed by  the  fell  spirit  of  despotic  intolerance 
which  established  the  inquisition,  and  incarce- 
rated aud  burnt  the  martyrs  in  the  dark  ages  of 
papal  Rome. 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  173 

CHAPTER  V. 

CREEDS. 

CampbellitCK  profess  to  reject  all  creeds — creeds  do  not 
produce  sects — those  who  use  creeds  do  not  equal  them 
to  scripture — uses  of  creeds — they  shew  in  what  sense 
scripture  is  received — they  promote  peace  and  harmony 
— do  not  prevent  the  free  useof  opinion — Campbellite* 
have  a  creed. 

Ever  since  Campbellism  began  to  develop  it- 
self, many  christians  have  looked  upon  some  of 
its  doctrines  and  assumptions,  as  too  absurd  to 
require  a  serious  refutation.  Those  points  to 
which  we  now  invite  attention,  have  been  con- 
sidered of  this  description;  but  though  we  have 
truth  on  our  side,  we  may  err,  by  placing  too 
much  dependence  upon  the  goodness  of  cur 
cause.  Some  one  has  said,  "  Let  not  the  advo- 
cates of  truth  trust  every  thing  to  their  cause 
and  do  nothing  themselves,  lest  the  vigilance  of 
error  should  triumph."  Believing  this  advice 
to  be  founded  in  wisdom,  and  applicable  to  the 
present  case,  v/e  intend  to  profit  by  the  sugges- 
tion. 

Mr.  Campbell  professes  to  reject  all  human 
creeds,  and  claims  for  himself  and  his  followers 
exemption  from  sectarianism.  To  adduce  from 
his  writings  proof  of  the  con*ectness  of  this 
statement,  is  unnecessary.  All  who  have  pe- 
rused the  "  Christian  Baptist,"  or  the  "Millen- 
nial Harbinger,"  have  discoversd  that  these 
p2 


174  CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED. 

assumptions  form  a  leading  feature  of  his  boast- 
ed reformation;  and  all  who  have  listened  to 
the  harangues  of  any  of  his  teachers,  proclaim- 
ers,  or  evangelists,  are  aware  that  the  "hue  and 
cry"  against  creeds  and  sectarianism,  as  man's 
work  and  priestcraft,  are  so  necessary  to  the 
existence  of  the  system  that  no  man  can  be  a 
legitimate  reformer  who  does  not  chime  in  and 
dance  to  the  same  measure.  To  the  existence 
of  creeds  and  confessions  of  faith,  they  attribute 
all  that  dissension  and  controversy  that  are 
found  among  christians  ;  and  professing  them- 
selves to  have  no  creed  but  the  NewTestament, 
they  modestly  claim  to  be,  not  a  sect  but  the 
WHOLE  CHURCH,  and  invite  us  to  abandon  our 
creeds,  and  unite  with  them  in  restoring  peace 
to  the  world,  and  in  bringing  in  the  latter-day 
glory.  Now,  all  this,  to  an  intelligent,  investi- 
gating mind,  acquainted  with  the  facts  of  the 
case,  is  sufficiently  ridiculous  to  furnish  its  own 
refutation.  But  all  men  are  not  intelligent,  or 
at  least  are  not  disposed  to  close  investigation 
where  matters  of  religious  controversy  are  con- 
cerned. Many  take  things  on  trust,  and  be- 
lieve them  because  others  say  they  are  true  ; 
and  hence  the  reckless  and  seeming  confident 
assertions  of  Mr.  Campbell's  proclaimers,  when 
not  met  and  refuted,  have  frequently  had!a  fa- 
vorable reception,  and  induced  some  to  believe 
that  Campbellites  do,  in  reality,  reject  all  hu- 
man opinions,  and  that  they  have  less  sectari- 
anism than  their  neighbors.  It  is  therefore 
certain,   that  an  investiffation   of  their  claims 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  175 

in  reference  to  these  points,  may  not  be   labor 
in  vain. 

We  have  already  intimated,  that  Mr.  Camp- 
bell attributes  the  difi'erent  opinions  and  parties 
that  are  found  in  the  christian  world,  to  the  ex- 
istence of  creeds ;  and  hence,  he  infers  that 
their  annihilation  would  unite  tiie  various  de- 
nominations, and  harmonize  the  whole  church. 
Now  it  is  admitted  that  this  inference  is  logical, 
and  would  necessarily  follow,  if  the  truth  of  the 
premises  could  be  established.  But  this  can 
never  be  done.  In  order  to  see  the  absurdity 
of  the  above  position,  it  is  only  necessary  for 
us  to  ascertain  the  cause  that  originated  differ- 
ent creeds.  No  effect  can  exist  uncaused. — 
But  different  creeds  do  exist ;  therefore  some 
cause  has  produced  them.  What  was  that 
cause?  Certainly,  not  unity  of  sentiment,  or 
opinion  of  the  church.  If  there  ever  was  a 
time  when  the  views  of  the  church  were  of  a 
oneness,  when  all  its  members  were  of  the 
same  mind,  and  entertained  the  same  opinions 
with  regard  to  the  import  of  the  Word  of  God, 
it  is  certain  that  that  time  could  not  have  given 
birth  to  different  creeds  ;  for  so  long  as  a  unity 
of  faith  continued,  such  creeds  could  not  have 
been  produced.  Members  of  the  Church  must 
have  differed  in  opinion  before  they  could  have 
expressed  discordant  views  upon  parchment  or 
paper  ;  and  hence  we  discover  that  differing 
creeds  originated  from  the  previous  existence  of 
conflicting  opinions  in  the  church.  To  sup- 
pose, therefore,  that  our  creeds  make   men   to 


176  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

differ,  and  have  caused  all  the  divisions  found 
among  christians,  involves  the  absurdity  of 
supposing  the  effect  to  be  older  and  more  pow- 
erful than  the  cause  that  produced  it.  It  is 
thus  seen  that  the  position  assumed  cannot  be 
maintained,  because  it  has  not  truth  for  its  basis  ; 
and  it  follows  of  course  that  the  inference  drawn 
from  it  must  necessarily  perish.  Indeed,  the 
supposition  that  the  destruction  of  creeds  would 
annihilate  party  spirit,  and  unite  the  various 
denominations  of  christians,  argues  so  little 
knowledge  of  human  nature  and  of  the  history 
of  the  world,  that  we  are  wholly  at  a  loss  to  see 
ho\v  men  of  the  intelligence  of  Mr.  Campbell  and 
some  of  his  proclaimers,  can  believe  it.  Man 
is  a  fallen  being — his  judgment  is  impaired,  and 
his  understanding  darkened.  In  this  state  of 
things,  the  minds  of  men  are  so  constituted  that 
they  must  necessarily  differ  in  opinion.  They 
never  have  beheld  all  things  through  the  same 
medium,  and  in  the  same  light,  nor  can  they 
ever  thus  see  them.  Now  suppose  this  cru- 
sade against  creeds,  confessions,  and  comment- 
aries to  be  successful;  imagine  every  thing  in 
the  shape  of  a  creed  destroyed,  every  book, 
manuscript,  and  pamphlet,  from  the  writings  of 
the  ancient  fathers,  down  to  the  last  number  of 
Mr.  Campbell's  Millennial  Harbinger,  com- 
mitted to  the  flames,  and  all  the  party  names  of 
all  the  christian  sects  forgotten :  imagine,  we 
say,  all  this  effected,  and  the  Bible  to  be  the 
only  religious  book  remaining  in  the  world. — 
And  what,  after  all,  would  be  the  result  ?    Why, 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  177 

wc  would  have  to  begin  anew  to  study  the  Scrip- 
tures ;  and  in  the  investigation,  some  would 
arrive  at  one  conclusion,  and  some  at  another. 
Some  would  consider  them  to  teach  that  the  Sa- 
vior is  the  self-existent,  unoriginated  Jehovah; 
others,  that  he  is  an  inferior  created  being ; 
some  would  settle  down  in  the  belief  of  uncon- 
ditional, universal  salvation ;  others  would  find 
salvation  suspended  upon  conditions ;  some 
would  conclude  that  Christ  died  in  the  same 
sense  for  every  man ;  others  that  the  merits  of 
his  death  were  only  designed  for  the  elect ;  some 
would  find  the  condition  of  the  pardon  of  sin 
to  be  faith ^  others  weald  consider  it  ivorks  ^ 
and  some  would  find  regeneration  by  the  Holy 
Spirit  clearly  taught  in  the  vScriptures  ;  while 
others,  like  Mr.  Campbell  and  the  Catholics, 
would  refer  this  work  to  the  water  of  Baptism. 
Now  ail  these  being  equally  sincere,  and  as 
each  considers  his  own  views  both  tnie  and  of 
vital  importance,  he  is  anxious  for  others  to  em- 
brace them,  and  v\''onders  why  any  one  should 
hesitate.  Here  then  is  the  beginning  of  strife  ; 
and  a  scene  of  contention  follows  far  more  af- 
flictive and  disastrous  than  any  that  could  arise 
between  the  different  sects  as  they  now  exist, 
and  the  only  way  of  restoring  peace  is  to  sep- 
arate, and  suffer  the  advocates  of  each  system 
of  doctrines  to  unite  to  preach  Christ  as  they 
understand  him,  and  worship  him  in  that  man- 
ner which  they  consider  the  Scriptures  to  autho- 
rize. Hence  the  whole  v/ould  result  in  the  for- 
mation of  different  creeds,  and  of  as  many  sects. 
8  * 


178  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

In  conversation  with  a  Campbellite  bishop,  a 
few  years  ago,  we  met  his  suggestion  that  Me- 
thodists should  throw  aside  their  Discipline, 
with  the  above  views,  to  which  he  only  an- 
swered, "  This  is  your  opinion."  We  replied, 
very  true,  but  it  is  an  opinion  so  well  founded 
and  reasonable,  that  it  is  morally  impossible  the 
result  should  be  otherwise  ;  for  that  which  has 
been  would  be  again  under  similar  circumstan- 
ces. And  as  conflicting  opinions  originally  di- 
vided the  church  into  sects,  and  induced  the  for- 
mation of  creeds,  it  is  obvious  that  the  cause 
must  be  removed  before  a  second  experiment 
could  produce  a  different  result.  But  the  cause 
is  not  removed,  nor  can  it  be.  Men  are  the 
same  imperfect,  erring  creatures  now,  that  they 
were  in  the  second  and  third  centuries.  They 
differ  in  opinion  and  judgment,  and  without  a 
miracle,  must  for  ever  differ.  Until  all  men 
can  be  fiirnished  with  the  same  amount  of  intel- 
lect, and  be  placed  upon  entire  equality  in  eve- 
ry other  respect,  it  is  impossible  to  bring  them 
to  think  alike.  It  is,  therefore,  unquestionable, 
that  the  destruction  of  all  our  creeds  and  confes- 
sions, and  the  rejection  of  all  party  names  and 
distinctions,  would  lead  to  much  strife,  and  end 
in  the  formation  of  sects  and  parties,  similar  to 
the  present,  if  not  worse. 

But  we  must  notice  another  position  assumec] 
by  these  would-be  creed  exterminators  ;  which 
is,  that  creeds  and  confessions  are,  by  those  tha 
adhere  to  them,  considered  paramount  to  th( 
Word   of  God.     Here  they  concentrate  theii 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  179 

Strength,  and  exhaust  their  powers  of  declamation 
and  assertion.  We  have  heard  them  declare  with 
the  most  unblushing  impudence  in  the  presence 
of  hundreds,  that  Methodists,  Presbyterians, 
Baptists,  and  all  other  sectarians,  substitute  their 
creeds  and  confessions  of  faith,  for  the  Bible,  and 
place  greater  dependence  upon  the  former  than 
the  latter  !  And  these  assertions  passing  for  truth 
with  the  "  unthinking  crowd,"  have  doubtless 
left  the  impression  upon  many  minds,  that  Camp- 
bellites  only  believe  and  receive  the  Bible,  while 
all  others  have  substituted  in  its  stead,  the  works 
of  uninspired  men.  But  are  those  who  make 
these  assertions  sincere  ?  Do  they  believe  what 
they  say  ?  In  charity  we  are  bound  to  suppose 
they  do  ;  but  this  admission  can  only  be  made  at 
the  expense  of  the  presumption  that  they  under- 
stand what  they  are  talking  about.  If  they  will 
examine  the  Methodist  Discipline,  they  will  find 
it  declared  that "  The  Holy  Scriptures  contain  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation,"  and  are  "  the  on- 
ly rule,  and  the  sufficient  rule,  both  of  our  faith 
and  practice."  And  in  this  we  are  not  singu- 
lar; our  sister  churches  hold  essentially  tha 
same  views.  The  sufficiency  of  the  Scriptures, 
as  a  rule  of  faith  and  practice,  forms  a  promi- 
nent feature  in  the  character  of  Protestant  Chris- 
tendom ;  and  she  acknowledges  throughout  all 
her  ranks  and  divisions,  "  that  whatsoever  is  not 
read  therein,  nor  may  be  proved  thereby,  is  not 
to  be  required  of  any  man  as  an  article  of  faith." 
What  then  are  we  to  think  of  those,  who  tell  us 
they  take  the  book,  and  make  the  Bible  their 


180  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

guide,  while  they  denounce  all  others  and 
charge  them  with  laying  more  stress  upon  the 
opinions  of  men  than  upon  the  word  of  God? 
We  have  already  admitted  that  they  may  be  sin- 
cere ;  but  we  did  not  make  this  admission  to 
forestall  the  judgment  of  the  reader.  We  leave 
him  to  determine  at  his  leisure,  whether  such 
assertions  be  the  fruits  of  dishonesty  or  of  ig- 
norance. 

But  to  the  mind  of  one  who  has  not  consid- 
ered this  subject  in  all  its  bearings,  a  difficulty 
may  here  arise  :  he  is  ready  to  inquire,  "  If  the 
Scriptures  be  the  only  rule  of  faith  and  prac- 
tice, where  then  is  the  necessity  for  creeds  ?" 
This  question  is,  in  part,  answered  already  in 
the  paragraph  preceding  the  last ;  but  it  may 
be  necessary  to  notice  it  further.     Creeds  are 
not  intended  to  teach,  or  make  known  new  doc- 
trines ;  and  consequently  they  do  not  lay  claim 
to  inspiration.     They  are  necessary,  1st.     To 
let  the  world  know  what  those  who  adopt  them, 
consider  the  Scriptures  to  teach.     All  v/ho  read 
the  Bible  may  agree  as  to  what  it  says,  but  its 
meaning  is  not  so  clear.     We  need  not  again 
remark  that  mankind  cannot  "  see  eye  to  eye'* 
—that  they  must   necessarily   have    different 
views  of  the  same  truth  ;  and  hence  in  reading 
the  Bible  they  will  receive  different,  and  some- 
times opposite  impressions  from  the  same  words. 
The  truth  of  this  is  abundantly  proved  by  facts; 
for  the  most  heterodox  and  absurd  parties  in 
Christendom  profess  to  derive  their  notions  from 
the  Bible.     Look  at  the  Unitarian,  the  Socini- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  181 

an,  the  Universalist,  the  Shaker  and  the  Mor- 
monite — all  professing  to  believe  the  Bible  as 
firmly  as  does  Mr.  Campbell ;  and  yet  contend- 
ing for  foolish  vagaries,  and  semi-infidel  theo- 
ries, differing  as  widely  from  each  other  as  Mr. 
Campbell's  Testament  differs  from  the  Word  of 
God.     Now  while  men,  sincerely  inquiring  af- 
ter truth,  continue  to  arrive  at  such  various  con- 
clusions, it  is  obvious  that  the  Bible,  though  it 
contains  every  thing  needful  for  salvation,  and 
is  the  only  rule  of  faith  and  practice,  is  not  a 
sufficient  expose  of  our  belief.     We  must  re- 
ceive nothing  as  an  article  of  faith,  that  is  not 
taught  therein  ;  but  still  the  Bible  does  not  show 
to  the  world  what  our  faith  is,  because  men  un- 
derstand it  difl^erently.     We  say  we  believe  the 
Bible,  and  so  say  a  thousand  others,  whose 
opinions  are  wholly  unlike  ours  ;  and  hence  our 
doctrines  are  unknown,  and  the  world  knows 
not  whether  to  rank  us  among  Unitarians,  or 
Trinitarians,  Socinians,  Universalists,  or  Camp- 
bellites.     In  proof,  we  might  refer  to  the  Uni- 
tarians of  our   country  who  reject  all  human 
creeds,  and  profess  to  take  the  Bible  alone.    To 
ascertain  what  they  do  believe  is  impossible  ; 
for  we  can  scarcely  find  two  of  them  that  be- 
lieve alike.     Is  it  not  clear  from  all  this,  that 
creeds  are  necessary  to  let  others  know  what 
we  understand  to  be  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible, 
and  that  we  are  neither  ashamed  nor  afraid  to 
declare  those  doctrines  to  the  world  ?     It  seems 
so  to  us.     And  so  long,  at  least,  as  Universal- 
ists and  Campbellites  tell  us  they  believe   t]je 
Q 


182  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED 

Bible,  we  shall  consider  it  our  duty  to  subscribe 
to  a  written  creed,  lest  we  be  identified  with  the 
one  or  the  other  and  thereby  give  countenance 
to  their  dangerous  absurdities. 

A  second    reason  for   adopting    creeds   and 
confessions  is,  that  the  peace  and  harmony  of 
the  general  church  may  be  the  better  preserved. 
This  will,  no  doubt,  appear  paradoxical  to  Uni- 
tarians or  Campbellites,  who  consider  creeds  to 
be  the  promoters  of  discord  and  strife  ;  but  we 
have  previously  shown  that  their  assumptions 
here  are  erroneous,-  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt 
that  the  christian  world  enjoys  more  quietness, 
as  now  divided  into  sects  and  ranged  under  their 
several  creeds,  than  it  would  do  if  all  its  paper 
walls  were  broken  down,  and  all  the  discordant 
materials  of  which  it  is  composed  jumbled  to- 
gether.    We  admit  that  the  destruction  of  creeds 
and  the  rejection  of  party  names,  might  be  pro- 
ductive of  good,   if  the  views  of  all  could  be 
broiight  to  harmonize.     But  can  this  be  done  ? 
No  ;  we  might  as  well  expect  to  find  all  men 
with  the  same  features,  and  of  the  same  stature. 
Human  nature  must  be   remodeled,  before  we 
can  rationally  look  for  either.    Seeing  then,  that 
mankind  must  necessarily  have  different  views 
of  the  truths  of  the  Bible,  and  that  it  is  utterly 
impossible  to  bring  them  to  understand  it  alike, 
is  it  not  superlatively  ridiculous  to  talk  of  pro- 
moting peace,  by  destroying  those  creeds,  un- 
der which  those,   whose  opinions  are  in  the 
main,  similar,  are  united,  and  by   which  they 
are  partially  separated  from  their  neighbors  of 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  183 

opposite  views,  and  tlirov/  them  all  together 
in  a  heterogeneous  mass  ?  Not  even  those  de- 
nominations whose  articles  of  faithhave  so  much 
sameness,  that  they  receive  the  appellation  of 
orthodox,  would  be  likely  to  harmonize  and 
work  well  together.  What  then  would  be  the 
result  if  these  were  compelled  to  unite  with 
Roman  Catholics,  Unitarians,  Universalists, 
Shakers,  and  Campbellites,  and  all  others  who 
profess  to  believe  the  Bible,  no  matter  how  ab- 
surd their  notions  may  be  ?  Who  does  not  see 
that  such  a  union,  would  be  no  union — that  such 
discordant  materials  coming  in  contact  would 
be  productive  of  anything  rather  than  peace  and 
harmony  ?  Contention  and  controversy  would 
certainly  follow  ;  and  experience  proves  that 
contentions  are  never  more  bitterly  carried  on 
than  when  they  exist  in  the  same  family.  "A 
house  divided  against  itself  cannot  stand,"  nor 
can  "two  walk  together  except  they  be  agreed." 
It  is  obvious,  then,  that  creeds  are  necessary, 
and  that  the  existence  of  sectional  divisions  is 
the  most  effectual  method  of  securing  the  peace 
of  the  whole  church. 

It  has  been  just  stated,  as  an  argument  for 
the  use  of  creeds,  that  men  in  reading  the  Bible 
cannot  fail  to  arrive  at  different  conclusions. 
This,  though  an  obvious  truth,  is  declared  by 
those  who  war  with  creeds  and  sects,  to  be 
derogatory  to  the  character  of  the  Scriptures  ; 
which,  they  tell  us,  always  "  mean  what  they 
say,"  and  say  their  meaning  so  plainly  that  "  a 
child  of  ten  years  old  may  understand  them." 


184  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

How  astonishing  is  it,  then,  that  these  same  men 
were  in  the  dark,  and  could  not  understand  the 
Scriptures,  till  Mr.  Campbell  came  over  the 
great  waters  to  enlighten  them.  But  the  truth 
is,  such  assertions  are  contradicted  by  the  expe- 
rience of  the  world.  The  fact  that  all  men 
cannot  understand  the  Scriptures  alike,  is  no 
evidence  that  the  Almighty  failed  in  communi- 
cating his  will  to  the  human  family.  It  only 
proves  the  ignorance  and  depravity  of  those  to 
whom  it  was  communicated.  Many  facts  re- 
corded in  the  New  Testament  go  to  prove  that 
the  disciples  of  our  Lord,  who  were  favored 
with  his  personal  instructions,  frequently  failed 
to  understand  him.  But  are  we  to  infer  from 
this,  that  Jesus  Christ  was  not  a  competent 
teacher?  By  no  means.  He  possessed  "all 
the  treasures  of  wisdom ;"  and  consequently 
knew  perfectly  what  instructions  to  give,  and 
the  best  manner  of  giving  them.  But  still, 
those  who  heard  his  words,  did  not  always  un- 
derstand him,  nor  always  agree  in  their  opinions. 
And  further,  Paul  and  Peter  could  not  agree  in 
all  things.  Paul  contended  that  Peter  was  to 
blame ;  and  no  doubt  Peter  thought  the  same 
of  the  other.  At  any  rate  they  separated,  and 
yet  they  continued  to  be  apostles  ;  and  while 
each  went  his  own  way,  they  both  proclaimed 
the  same  Lord  and  Savior.  Seeing  then,  that 
men  are  so  constituted  that  entire  unity  of  opin- 
ion, with  regard  to  the  doctrines  of  Christ,  is 
impossible,  is  it  not  better  for  them,  like  Abra- 
ham and  Lot,  to  separate  under  different  creeds, 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  185 

and  preserve  peace,  than  to  continue  together, 
and  foment  discord  and  strife  ? 

But  we  are  told  that  creeds  are  uncharitable 
and  arbitrary — that  they  are  intended  to  bind 
men's  consciences,  and  control  their  opinions. 
This,  however,  is  a  mistake.     Protestant  creeds 
are  not  designed  to  coerce  either  credence  or 
obedience.     For  instance,  the  articles  of  faith, 
received  by  the  Methodist  Episcopal  church,  do 
not  compel  any  man  to  adopt  them.     They  man- 
ifest to  the  world,  what  we  consider  to  be  the 
leading  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  and  thus  serve 
as  a  rallying  point  where  those  who  believe  with 
us  may  meet  and  unite.     These  we  cordially 
receive,  and  admit  into  fellowship ;  but  those 
who  understand  the  Scriptures  differently,  have 
no  inducement,  nor  compulsion  to  unite  with  us ; 
and  we  rejoice  that  they  may  find  some  other 
denomination,  whose  views  they  may  adopt, 
and  with  whom  they  may  conscientiously  wor- 
ship God  in  their  own  way.     The  same  may 
be  said  of  the  creeds  and  economy  of  our  sis- 
ter churches.     Thus  men  are  not  bound  to  pin 
their  faith  to  this  or  that  creed,  any  further  than 
they  may  believe  it  compatible  with  the  Word 
of  God.     That  alone  is  the  test  of  all  creeds. 
Nor  are  they  bound,  after  they  have  adopted  a 
certain  creed,  always  to  adhere  to  it.     They 
still  have  liberty  of  conscience,  and  enjoy  the 
privilege  of  changing  their  opinions  and  their 
creed,  when  they  choose.     Hence,  it  is  obvi- 
ous, that  there  is  nothing  unreasonable  or  arbi- 
trary in  the  existence  of  creeds  and  sects ;  and 
q2 


186  CAMPBELLiSM    EXPOSED. 

that  they  do  not  necessarily  cause  strife,  or  hin- 
der the  progress  of  the  gospel.     It  is  admitted 
that  between  the  different  families  of  the  house- 
hold of  faith,  unnecessary  and  hurtful  conten- 
tion does  sometimes  exist ;  but  it  is  denied  that 
this  is  the  legitimate  and  unavoidable  result  of 
their  party  establishments.     Its  origiu  may  be 
traced  to  the  erring  judgments,  the  discordant 
materials,  and  the  unholy  passions  that  enter 
into  the  composition  of  fallen  human  nature  ; 
and  as  these  would  be  the  same,  the  strife  would 
be  far  more  bitter,  and  the  consequences  more 
disastrous,  if  the  contending  parties  were  more 
intimately  connected.     Sectional  divisions,  we 
repeat,  do  not  necessarily  produce  contention; 
or  retard  the  progress  of  the  gospel.     While 
under  this  regulation,  we  have  the  privilege  of 
enjoying  our  opinions,  and  of  worshipping  God 
according  to  the  dictates  of  our  consciences,  and 
our  understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  we  may, 
and  should  rejoice,  that  others  have  the  same 
privilege.     My  Presbyterian  and  Baptist  neigh- 
bors do  not  see  as  I  do ;  but  this  is  no  good  rea- 
son for  our  quarrelling.     We  are  all  children 
of  the  same  Parent,  members  of  the  same  gene- 
ral family,  contending  against  the  same  common 
foes,  and  aiming  for  the  same  heaven,  and  there 
fore  have  no  cause  to  "  fall  out  by  the  way." 
On  the   contrary,   our  party  distinctions  may 
be  the  means  of  provoking  and  stimulating  each 
denomination  to  "love  and  good  works  ;"  and 
there  is  little  doubt,  that  this  very  circumstance 
causes  more  sermons  to  be  preached  than  other- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  187 

wise  would  be,  and  that  it  is  subservieni  to  the 
"  furtherance  of  the  gospel." 

But  after  all,  theCampbellite,  glorying  in  his 
imaginary  adherence  to  the  New  Testament 
alone,  will  sneeringly  remark :  "  Ail  your  creeds, 
disciplines,  and  confessions  of  faith,  are  man's 
^vork,  and  nothing  more  than  human  opinions." 
And  this  point  we  shall  certainly  not  dispute 
about.  They  are  human  opinions  ;  they  claim 
to  be  nothing  more.  But  they  are  the  honest 
opinions  of  those  who  adopt  them,  founded,  as 
they  believe,  upon  the  Wo^xl  of  God — -an  ex- 
pression of  their  views  of  the  Scripture,  or  the 
manner  in  which  they  understand  the  Bible. 
And  have  not  all  men  opinions  of  their  own  ? 
Is  it  possible  for  any  man  to  read  the  Bible,  or 
to  bear  it  read,  and  form  no  opinions  as  to  its 
contents  ?  Can  any  one  have  no  sentiments,  or 
understand  the  Bible  in  no  v»'ay  ?  If  so,  he  must 
be  a  queer  genius — a  perfect  unique  :  and,  con- 
sequently, not  a  very  suitable  person  for  others 
to  pattern  after.  Bu  I  we  do  no i  bring  this  charge 
(gainst  Mr.  Campbell.  We  intend  just  now  to 
prove  that  his  brain  is  as  rife  with  opinions  and 
notions  as  most  men's ;  and  that  he  is  not  at  all 
scrupulous  about  communicating  them  to  others, 
fo  as  to  gain  proselytes  ;  and  that  he  an«l  his 
followers  adhere  as  tenaciously  to  their  opinions 
as  those  who  adopt  written  creeds.  So  long 
then,  as  all  men  must  necessarily  have  their 
opinions,  where  is  the  difference  between  a 
,'ritten  and  verbal  creed?  As  it  respects  a 
man's  sentiments,  they  are  certainly  the  same ; 


188  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

but  the  former  in  openly  declaring  their  senti- 
ments to  the  world,  manifest  far  more  honesty 
and  consistency,  than  the  latter,  who,  under 
the  garb  of  catholicity  of  spirit,  profess  to  re- 
ject all  human  opinions,  while  they  retain  as 
much  bigotry  and  intolerance  as  the  most  bitter 
sectarians. 

It  is  now  time  for  us  to  examine  more  particu- 
larly this  Campbellite  cant,  which  tells  us,  they 
adhere  only  to  the  Bible,  and  have  no  opinions 
of  their  own.  That  such  are  their  claims,  no 
one  who  has  any  knowledge  of  them  will  ques- 
tion. Who  ever  listened  to  the  harangues  of 
one  of  their  proclaimers,  or  conversed  with  a 
Campbellite  for  half  an  hour  upon  the  subject 
of  religion,  that  did  not  hear  him  rail  out  against 
creeds  and  sects,  while  he  assumed  that  he  and 
his  brethren  of  the  reformation,  were  not  sec- 
tarian, had  rejected  all  human  opinions,  and  re- 
ceived nothing  but  what  they  derived  immediate- 
ly from  the  New  Testament  ?  To  convince  the 
public  of  the  soundness  of  these  claims,  has  been'' 
one  of  their  leading  objects,  from  the  beginning. 
We  recollect  an  instance  of  one  of  their  bishops 
soliciting  the  members  of  other  churches  to  as- 
sist them,  in  preparing  for  an  approaching  pop-  ^ 
ular  meeting  at  which  the  presence  of  Mr. 
Campbell  was  expected,  and  the  ground  of  his 
plea  was  that  all  should  aid  them,  because  there 
was  nothing  sectarian  in  their  meetings  or  do- 
ings. We  have  often  heard  it  iterated,  as  a 
proof  of  their  anti-sectarian  character,  that  they 
do  not  embrace  the  views  of  any  critic,  com- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  189 

mentator,  divine,  or  creed-maker,  but  follow  the 
apostles,  and  believe  in,  and  are  governed  by 
the  New  Testament  alone. 

Now  whether  we  be  ignorant  and  blind  by 
reason  of  sectarian  prejudice,  others  must  deter- 
mine ;  but  in  truth,  from  some  cause  or  other, 
we  are  wholly  unable  to  see  the  force  of  this 
last  argument,  or  to  admit  the  truth  of  the  as- 
sumptions it  is  intended  to  sustain.  Granting, 
for  argument  sake,  that  the  Campbellites  follow 
in  the  steps  of  no  creed-maker,  commentator,  or 
expounder,  does  this  prove  them  to  be  no  sect  ? 
Have  they  not  their  own  views  and  opinions  ? 
Do  they  not  teach  doctrines,  establish  rules,  and 
follow  practices  of  their  own  ?  And  do  not  these 
views  and  practices,  which  distinguish  them 
from  other  denominations,  stamp  them  with  the 
essential  features  of  sectarianism  ?  "  O  no — not 
at  all,"  say  they,  "  for  our  doctrines,  govern- 
ment, and  practice,  are  all  derived  from  the  New 
Testament."  And  now  the  whole  secret  is  out. 
Campbellites  receive  their  opinions  from  the 
New  Testament,  or  at  least  they  say  they  do,  of 
course  every  thing  they  think  to  be  true  must 
be  so,  and  every  opinion  that  comes  in  contact 
Avith  their  notions  must  be  man's  opinion ;  and 
therefore  they  have  not  one  particle  of  sectarian- 
ism about  them,  while  all  who  refuse  to  join  them 
are  sectarians  and  man-worshippers.  Now  all 
this  would  be  plain  enough,  but  for  a  difficulty 
that  is  so  ill-natured  as  to  obtrude.  Unfortu- 
nately for  this  anti-sectarian  establishment,  she 
is  not  alone  in  claiming  to  derive  her  doctrines 


190  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

and  usages  from  the  Scriptures  ;  for  it  so  hap- 
pens, that  Baptists,  Presbyterians,  Methodists, 
and  all  others,  from  the  High  Church  of  Eng- 
land, down  to  the  lov/est  and  most  insignificant 
sect  that  has  attained  a  name  in  the  Cl>ristian 
world,  set  up  the  same  claim.  All  profess  and 
believe  their  doctrmes  to  accord  with  the  Scrip- 
tures, as  confidently  as  do  Campbellites.  Who 
then  is  to  decide  tlie  question  that  arises  ? 
Campbellites  of  course  claim  this  privilege  ;  and 
have  already  decided  it  in  their  own  favor,  and 
thereby  passed  sentence  of  condemnation  upon 
every  man  and  woman  in  the  world  who  cannot 
read  the  Scriptures  through  their  spectacles. 
And  still,  we  inust  not  suppose  that  there  is  any 
self,  sectarianism,  bigotry  or  intolerance  in  this 
decision.  Really  there  is  something  so  prepos- 
terous in  all  this,  that  we  find  it  no  easy  matter 
to  treat  it  with  becoming  gravity.  To  see  a 
little  party,  occupying  the  dimensions  of  a  mere 
point  upon  the  map  of  Protestant  Christendom, 
strutting  in  all  the  pride  of  imaginary  greatness, 
assuming  airs,  exclaiming,  "  We  are  the  men — 
wisdom  will  die  with  us — we  are  Christ's,  you 
belong  to  anti-Christ — we  have  the  true  faith 
and  are  the  true  church,  you  are  deluded  secta- 
rians, following  the  opinions  of  men  instead  of 
the  commandments  of  God."  We  say,  gentle 
reader,  to  see  all  this,  is  it  not  enough  to  excite 
the  risibility  of  the  most  phlegmatic  ?  But  we 
must  check  our  mirth  ;  for  the  picture  presents 
another  aspect,  upon  beholding  which  we  can- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  191 

iiot  but  exclaim,  poor  human  nature,  alas,  how 
art  thou  fallen  ! 

But  in  the  last  paragraph,  we  have  rather  di- 
gressed from  our  present  object,  and  partially 
anticipated  the  subject.  We  will  now  return 
and  notice  some  of  Mr.  Campbell's  opinions, 
and  endeavor  to  ascertain  how  far  they  have 
the  force  of  a  creed  with  his  follov/ers.  We 
are  aware  that  a  full  and  explicit  creed,  setting 
forth  the  opinions  of  Mr.  Campbell,  might 
be  collected  from  his  writings,  in  his  own 
words ;  but  we  have  not  leisure  at  present  for 
this  course,  nor  is  it  indeed,  necessary.  The  fol- 
lowing items  of  belief,  stated,  however,  in  our 
own  language,  are  found  in  the  writings  and  ac- 
tions of  Mr.  Campbell,  and  so  far  as  we  know 
or  believe,  universally  adopted  by  I^s  followers. 

1.  Creeds  and  confessions  are  useless  and 
mischievous — we  will  have  none. 

2.  God  calls  no  man  to  preach  the  gospel — 
we  will  believe  no  man  who  says  he  is  "  called 
and  sent." 

3.  The  Holy  Spirit  has  nothhig  to  do  with  sin- 
ners— the  Word  and  Spirit  are  synonymous. 

4.  There  can  be  no  christian  experience  be- 
fore inmiersion — immersion  alone  is  the  act  of 
turning  to  God. 

5.  Immersion  is  an  institution  divinely  ap- 
pointed for  the  remission  of  sins — no  man  can 
enjoy  the  peace  of  God  or  the  hope  of  heaven, 
till  he  goes  down  into  the  water. 

6.  It  is  folly  to  pray  for  the  pardon  of  sin — 
■^0  immersed 


192  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

7.  Immersion,  regeneration,  and  conversion 
are  convertible  terms,  and  mean  the  same  thing 
— immersion  is  conversion. 

8.  The  common  version  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  not  to  be  trusted — we  will  have  a  Tes- 
tament of  our  own,  that  shall  agree  with  our 
opinions. 

It  would  be  no  difficult  matter  to  swell  the 
number  of  these  articles  of  faith  ;  but  we  have 
given  a  few  of  the  prominent  features  of  the  re- 
formation, and  a  sufficiency  for  our  present 
purpose.  Now  we  shall  not  stop  to  inquire, 
whether  there  is  nothing  of  mere  opinion  in  the 
above  positions.  Some  of  them  we  have  ex- 
amined in  our  preceding  numbers,  and  found 
to  be  based  entirely  upon  human  opinion ;  and 
the  others  we  are  willing  to  submit  to  the  judg- 
ment of  the  intelligent  reader,  who  will  be  fully 
competent  to  detect  the  absurdity  of  the  attempt 
to  palm  such  dogmas  upon  the  Word  of  God. 
But  we  would  inquire,  whether  those  who  adopt 
the  above  or  any  thing  similar,  do  not  thereby,  , 
essentially  and  substantially,  subscribe  to  a 
creed.  We  admit,  that  they  do  not,  in  so  ma- 
ny words,  do  this — i.  e.  they  have  no  instru- 
ment in  writing,  or  in  print,  which  they  ac- 
knowledge as  their  creed.  But  what  of  this  ? 
So  long  as  they  receive  the  notions  of  Mr. 
Campbell,  and  look  up  to  him  as  an  oracle,  are 
they  not  as  much  creed-bound  as  any  of  us  ? 
"No,"  say  they,  "for  we  are  not  obliged  to 
believe  what  Mr.  Campbell  writes,  unless  it 
agree  with  Scripture."     And  so  say  Presbyte- 


CAMPEELLISM   EXPOSED.  193 

rians  and  Methodists,  in  relation  to  their  creeds 
and  standard  writings.  They  are  not  bound  to 
receive  any  thing  except  it  be  consistent  with 
the  Word  of  God.  And  if  they  should  become 
so  far  bewildered  as  to  reject  the  Bible  for  the 
reformation  and  Mr.  Campbell's  deformed  Tes- 
tament, they  are  entirely  free  to  do  so  at  any 
moment.  Where  then  is  the  difference  between 
Campbellites  and  others,  in  relation  to  this  mat- 
ter ?  It  is  this — the  latter  have  the  candor  to 
avow  their  sentiments,  and  publish  them  to  the 
world  as  such ;  the  former  adopt  their  own  no- 
tions, or  rather  those  of  their  leader,  and  hang 
to  them  with  a  tenacity  very  much  like  obstina- 
cy, and  still  have  the  inconsistency  to  tell  the 
world,  "  We  have  no  creed,  no  sectarianism,  no 
opinions  of  our  own."  Perhaps  there  is  some 
truth  in  this  latter  assertion.  They  may  have 
no  opinions  of  their  own ;  but  then  it  is  certain 
they  have  adopted  those  that  Mr.  Campbell  has 
manufactured  for  them. 


R 


194  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

SECTS— SECTARIANISM. 

Mr.  Campbell  imitates  the  Pope — Campbellism  peculiar- 
ly sectarian — a  dialogue — Campbellites  excel  in  big- 
otry and  intolerance — They  idolize  their  leader — as- 
sume the  name  Reformers — are  properly  Campbellites. 

We  hope  the  reader  will  not  understand  any 
thing  we  have  said  as  an  apology  for  conten- 
tion, uncharitableness  or  bigotry  among  chris- 
tians. We  lament  the  existence  of  these  things 
as  sincerely  as  does  any  Campbellite,  and  will 
cheerfully  co-operate  with  him  in  any  measure 
that  is  likely  to  remove  them  ;  but  till  he  shall 
devise  something  more  feasible  than  his  denun- 
ciation of  creeds  and  sects,  we  must  beg  to  be  ex- 
cused. Indeed,  the  clamor  against  sectarianism, 
to  which  Mr.  Campbell  has  given  currency,  sa- 
vors too  much  of  the  arrogant  and  selfish  pre- 
tensions of  the  Papal  See,  and  it  is  too  much 
like  the  cant  of  the  avowed  enemies  of  Christi- 
anity, to  be  entitled  to  much  respect.  When 
he  assumes  that  his  party  are  not  a  sect,  but  the 
true  and  only  church,  and  condemns  all  who  do 
not  subscribe  to  his  views,  as  the  followers  of 
anti-Christ,  he  does  that  which  the  Popa  of 
Rome  did  long  before  he  was  born ;  and  when 
he  harps  upon  the  term  sectarian,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  bringing  the  religious  denominations  in- 
to contempt,  he  is  only  walking  in  the  footsteps 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  195 

of  those  whose  labors  have  been  devoted  to  the 
extirpation  of  Christianity. 

With  Mr.  Campbell  and  his  followers,  the 
terms  sect,  and  sectarian,  are  uniformly  used  in 
a  bad  sense  by  way  of  stigma  and  reproach. 
They  are  designed  to  set  a  mark  upon  those  to 
whom  they  are  applied,  and  to  stamp  their  works 
with  infamy.  Let  a  man  belong  to  any  denom- 
ination except  Mr.  Campbell's,  and  his  theolo- 
gical works,  though  written  with  the  greatest 
ability,  and  manifesting  every  reasonable  liber- 
ality of  sentiment,  will,  by  them,  be  denounced 
as  worthless  or  suspicious.  Such  is  their  theory 
at  least,  and  such  their  general  practice.  We 
were  present,  a  few  years  ago,  where  several 
persons  were  conversing  about  Buck's  Theolo- 
oical  Dictionary.  All  spoke  of  it  in  terms  of 
approbation,  except  a  Campbellite  bishop,  who 
formed  one  of  the  company,  and  who,  after 
hearing  the  opinions  of  the  rest,  observed  with 
a  sneer,  "  Buck  was  a  sectarian,  and  the  M'rit- 
ings  of  all  such  are  entitled  to  little  confidence." 
Now  if  those  who  thus  stamp  with  the  seal  of 
reprobation  whatever  obtains  the  name  of  sec- 
tarian, were  themselves  free  from  that  which 
they  condemn  in  others,  their  conduct  would  be 
less  reprehensible  ;  but  even  then  we  should 
object  to  that  sense  in  which  they  use  the  term 
in  question.  It  is  a  misapplication.  The  word 
sect  signifies  nothing  more  than  a  number  of  in- 
dividuals associated  in  the  belief  of  some  com- 
mon doctrines.  Am.ong  the  ancient  philoso- 
phers we  read  of  the  Academic,  Stoic,  and  Ec- 


196  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

lectic  sects,  and  among  the  Jews,  of  the  sects 
of  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees.  But  to  none 
of  these  does  the  term  sect  huply  a  reproach,  nor 
should  it  be  so  used  in  its  apphcation  to  christians. 

But  suppose  we  waive  this,  and  admit  that  a 
sectarian  is  a  man  worshiper,  and  that  sectari- 
anism is  worse  than  heathenism,  and  what  then  ? 
Will  it  follow  that  A.  Campbell  is  the  proper 
person  to  point  the  finger  of  scorn — to  "  cry- 
havoc,  and  let  slip  the  dogs  of  war,"  upon  all 
whom  he  may  choose  to  stigmatize  as  sectari- 
ans ?  Not  at  all,  unless  we  invert  the  rule  of 
our  Savior,  "  Let  him  who  is  without  sin,  cast 
the  first  stone."  Reformation,  like  charity, 
should  begin  at  home.  AVe  must  cast  the  beam 
out  of  our  own  eye,  before  we  can  see  clearly 
to  remove  the  mote  from  our  neighbor's.  And 
we  much  doubt  whether  any  man  in  America  is 
plagued  with  a  greater  sectarian  beam,  than  is 
Alexander  Campbell;  and  if  so,  he  is  the  last 
man  who  should  condemn  this  in  others.  But 
his  sectarianism  is  not  the  worst.  A  man  may  be 
a  strict  sectarian,  and  still  manifest  mildness,  for- 
bearance, and  liberality  of  feeling  and  judgment 
toward  others.  But  this  is  not  the  course  of  Mr. 
Campbell ;  for  while  he  denounces  creeds  and 
sects  as  the  promoters  of  an  intolerant  and  per- 
secuting spirit,  he  manifests  in  himself,  at  least, 
as  much  of  that  spirit,  as  ought  to  fall  to  the  lot  of 
any  good  man,  and  much  more  than  can  be  charg- 
ed upon  those  whom  he  so  freely  condemns. 

But  in  these  remarks  we  may  be  presuming 
too  much  upon  the  reader's  knowledge  of  facts; 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  197 

and  he,  in  the  absence  of  that  knowledge,  will, 
probably,  charge  us  with  judging  harshly,  and 
with  arriving  at  an  unwarrantable  conclusion. 
In  order,  therefore,  that  he  may  judge  for  himself 
whether  Mr.  Campbell  and  his  adherents,  are,  or 
are  not  infected  with  the  worst  kind  of  sectarian- 
ism, we  deem  it  expedient  to  extend  our  remarks. 
Our  Lord  and  Savior  has  authorized  us  to 
judge  of  men  by  their  fruits  ;  and  if  the  fruits 
of  A.  Campbell's  reformation  do  not  warrant 
the  conclusion  that  he  is  an  illiberal  and  uncom- 
promising sectarian,  we   are  much  mistaken. 
This  opinion  has  been  formed,  and  is  now  ex- 
pressed, with  a  perfect  knowledge  of  the  fact 
that  he  pleads  "  not  guilty."     We  know  that 
his  professed  object  has  been  to  break  down  the 
partition  walls  that  separate  christians,  and  to 
drive  bigotry  and  intolerance  from  the  earth ; 
and  that  some  visionaries  have  really  fancied 
him  in  a  fair  way  to  accomplish  this,  and  bring 
all  to  see  eye  to  eye.     But  have  these  hopes 
and  promises  been  realized  ?     Have  his  labors 
diminished  the  number  of  sects,  checked  party 
strife,  or  increased  the  spirit  of  love  and  for- 
bearance among  christians  ?     Just  the  reverse  ; 
for  he  has,  in  his  own  followers,  formed  an  ad- 
ditional sect,  whose  bigotry  and  intolerance  are 
in  a  fair  way  to  become  proverbial ;  and  instead 
of  peacti  he  has  deluged  many  towns  andneigh- 
Dorhoods   with   the   bitter  waters   of  strife. — 
These  are  the  well  known  fruits  of  the  refor- 
mation s  and  if  the  mischief  has  been  compa- 
ratively small,  we  owe  it  not  to  the  forbearance 
r2 


198  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

or  mercy  of  its  propagators.  "  Divide  and  con- 
quer" has  been  their  motto  ;  and  the  universal 
extermination  of  their  opponents,  their  object. 
When  an  individual  has  been  so  weak  as  to 
leave  some  orthodox  church  and  join  them,  they 
have  considered  it  an  achievement  worth  pub- 
lishing in  capitals  throughout  the  land ;  and 
when  they  have  succeeded  in  distracting  and  di- 
viding a  church,  it  has  been  a  subject  of  no  lit- 
tle rejoicing.  They  have  been  heard  to  boast 
that  they  had  destroyed  the  Baptist  church  in 
Kentucky,*  and  to  declare  their  determination  to 
effect  the  same  in  the  Methodist  and  Presbyterian 
churches.  Thus,  instead  of  promoting  the  peace 
of  Zion,  and  establishing  "  good  will"  upon  the 
ruins  of  sectarianism,  Mr.  Campbell's  labors  have 
resulted  in  the  production  of  a  new  sect,  so  intol- 
erant that  their  hand  is  against  every  man,  and 
who,  Nero  like,  glory  in  their  works  of  desola- 
tion. 

It  is,  however,  admitted,  that  a  man's  failure 
to  accomplish  what  he  proposes,  is  not  always 
sufficient  evidence  that  he  desired  such  failure  ; 
and  hence,  though  a  self  styled  reformer  should 
not  succeed  in  driving  bigotry  from  the  earth, 
we  must  not,  from  this  circumstance,  infer  that 

*  We  are  gratified  to  discover  that  this  boast  concern- 
ing the  Baptist  church  was  founded  in  mistake.  For 
that  church,  though  in  some  places  for  a  time,  apparently 
trammeled  and  divided  by  the  spread  of  Campbellism, 
has  since  risen  with  increased  strength,  as  we  are  inform- 
ed, and  it  is  confidently  believed  that  the  Campbell  fever 
will  eventuate  in  her  good% 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  199 

he  is,  himself,  a  bigot.     But  we  maintain  that 
the  intolerant  and  selfish  spirit  of  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's party  is  the  legitimate  result  of  his  prin- 
ciples and  practice.     From  the  time  his  system 
of  operations  began  to  assume  an  intelligible 
form,  it  has  embodied  some  ingredients,  as  fo- 
reign from  the  spirit  of  toleration  as  were  the 
principles  that  originated  the  Spanish  Inquisi- 
tion.    This  may  seem  a  hard  saying,  but  we 
are  fully  convinced  of  its  truth,  and  hope  also 
to  convince  the  reader,  if  he  will  only  have  pa- 
tience to  hear  us  out.     And  yet,  in  some  respects, 
Mr.  Campbell   has   appeared   even  "  fierce  for 
moderation,"  and  liberality  toward  the  opinions 
of  others.     We  recollect  to  have  read  several 
of  his  articles  in  the  Millennial  Harbinger,  some 
four  or  five  years  ago,  professedly  designed  to 
point  out  a  way  for  the  union  of  all  the  sects. 
This  plan,  according  to  present  recollection, 
proposed  that  christians  should  cease  to  attach 
any  importance  to  doctrines,  and  unite  upon  a 
belief  of  the  facts  of  the  New  Testament.    On 
this  ground  he  announced  his  willingness    to 
harmonize  with  Unitarians  and  Trinitarians, 
Arm,inians,  Calvinists,   Socinians,   and  Uni- 
versalists.     "■  Let  them,"  said  he,  "  hold  their 
opinions,  but  let  them  hold  them  as  private  pro- 
perty, and  all  will  be  well."     Now  this,  indeed, 
appears  liberal  enough,  and  doubtless  some  will 
consider  it  as  going  a  little  beyond  the  mark ; 
but  with  this  we  shall  not,  at  present,  concern, 
though  we  have  no  desire  to  amalgamate  with 
Socinians  or  Universalists.     Nor  shall  we  dis- 


200  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

pute  about  the  importance  of  believing  the  doc- 
trines as  well  as  the  facts  of  the  gospel.  The 
apostles  speak  of  "  good  doctrine,"  of"  sound 
doctrine,"  and  of  "the  doctrine  that  is  accord- 
ing to  godliness,"  while  they  warn  us  against 
being  "carried  about  by  every  wind  of  doctrine." 
Here,  then,  Mr.  Campbell  seems  at  issue  with 
the  apostles,  and  we  leave  him  to  adjust  the 
matter  in  the  best  manner  he  can.  But  we 
would  ascertain  how  far  the  above  proposition 
justifies  him  in  his  anti-sectarian  pretensions, 
and  professed  liberality  of  sentiment.  It  says, 
it  is  true,  that  he  considers  some  doctrines  that 
have  occasioned  much  controversy,  not  to  be 
worth  disputing  about,  and  that  they  should  be 
no  bar  to  christian  union  and  fellowship )  but 
does  he  extend  the  same  liberality  to  all  other 
doctrines  contested  among  christians  ?  To 
test  this  matter  we  will  suppose  a  case.  Let 
the  reader  bear  in  mind  that  Mr.  Campbell  avows 
his  willingness  to  unite  with  all  who  t)elieve  the 
gospel  facts,  whatever  their  opinions  may  be, 
provided  they  hold  them  as  private  property ; 
and  in  view  of  this  declaration,  we  will  sup- 
pose that  a  pious  Presbyterian,  tired  of  contro- 
versy, applies  for  admission  into  his  commu- 
nion, or  for  the  privilege  of  meeting  him  at  the 
table  of  the  Lord.  The  following  dialogue,  or 
something  like  it,  would  ensue  : 

Campbell.  Do  you  believe  that  Jesus  Christ 
is  the  Son  of  God  ? 

Applicant,     I  do. 


i 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  201 

C.  Do  you  believe  that  he  died  for  our  sins, 
and  rose  again  for  our  justification  ? 

Jl.     I  do. 

C.  Have  you  been  immersed  for  remission 
of  sins  1 

A.     No  :  I  was  baptized  in  infancy. 

C.  That  is  of  no  vahie  ;  you  must  be  im- 
mersed, or  we  cannot  receive  you. 

Ji.  Indeed !  Why,  sir,  you  astonish  me. 
I  believe  the  facts  of  the  New  Testament  as 
firmly  as  any  man  in  your  communion  ;  and  I 
am  so  well  convinced  of  the  validity  of  my  bap- 
tism, that  I  could  not  be  immersed  without  do- 
ing violence  to  my  conscience.  But  I  hold  my 
views  of  baptism  as  private  property,  having 
no  wish  to  make  them  a  condition  of  commu- 
nion, or  to  require  others  to  adopt  them.  Sure- 
ly then,  to  be  consistent  with  your  avowed 
principles,  you  must  receive  me. 

C.  No  sir.  That  matter  has  been  already 
decided.  You  must  stand  aside,  for  until  you 
are  immersed,  you  cannot  be  a  christian ;  nor 
can  we  give  you  the  least  countenance  as 
one. 

The  consequence  here  is,  that  the  applicant 
is  unchristianized,  and  repulsed  from  what  they 
term  the  Lord's  table  ;  and  for  no  other  reason 
than  his  inability  to  think  as  does  Mr.  Camp- 
bell. And  this  intolerant  principle  lies  at  the 
very  foundation  of  the  system,  and  is  carried 
out  through  all  its  operations,  and  hence  some  of 
its  adherents  have  gone  so  far  as  to  refuse  to 
unite  in  prayer  with  those  families  that  would 
9  * 


202  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

not  be  immersed  for  remission  of  sins.  Per- 
haps, though,  Mr.  Campbell  considers  immer- 
sion one  of  the  gospel  facts  ;  but  a  vast  majority 
of  the  christian  world  think  differently,  and  are 
warranted  so  to  do,  by  the  fact  that  the  word  is 
not  to  be  found  in  the  Bible.  We  have  ever 
been  ready  to  admit  the  sincerity  of  those  who 
adhere  to  immersion  as  the  only  mode  of  bap- 
tism ;  but  after  all,  it  is  only  their  opinion,  for 
the  Scriptures  do  not  inform  us  how  the  apos- 
tles baptized.  They  administered  the  ordinance 
"with  water,"  but  whether  by  sprinkling,  pour- 
ing, or  dipping,  is  at  present  unknown,  and 
must  forever  remain  so,  unless  the  world  should 
be  favored  with  a  new  revelation.  Therefore, 
when  Mr.  Campbell  assumes  immersion  to  be 
an  unquestionable  fact,  recorded  in  the  New 
Testament,  he  goes  a  little  further  than  a  mod- 
est man  would  be  willing  to  venture  ;  and  when 
he  denounces  those  who  cannot  believe  with" 
him  on  this  point,  as  vipers,  hypocrites,  and 
man-worshipers,  and  refuses  to  acknowledge 
them  as  the  followers  of  Christ,  he  evinces  the 
very  same  spirit  of  intolerance  that  established 
the  Inquisition.  "  You  must  surrender  your 
judgment  and  opinions  into  our  hands,"  says 
the  church  of  Rome,  and  so  says  Mr.  Camp- 
bell. It  is  true,  he  cares  not  whether  we  are 
Arians,  Socinians,  or  Universalists  ;  in  this  lie 
is  very  liberal  in  his  commands ;  but  then,  we 
must  adopt  his  notions  of  the  efficacy  of  bap- 
tism, and  receive  it  according  to  his  ij^se  dixit, 
or  he  pronounces  us  "  unpardoned,  and  lost  to 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  203 

all  christian  life  and  enjoyment."  Very  mod- 
erate indeed  !  With  much  justice  has  an  anon- 
ymous satirist  represented  him  as  saying", 

"  I  little  care  what  men  believe, 

Provided  they  my  faith  receive, 

And  come  to  me,  with  me  unite, 

And  think  my  views  and  plans  are  right ; 

And  swear  allegiance  to  the  water — 

As  for  the  rest,  'tis  little  matter." 

This  is  the  true  state  of  the  case.  Profes- 
sing great  deference  to  the  opinions  of  others 
and  an  anxious  desire  for  union,  Campbellites, 
by  their  conduct,  say  to  all  the  world,  "  You 
must  come  to  us,  believe  with  us,  and  let  us 
immerse  you  ;  and  then  we'll  unite,  and  peace 
and  love  shall  be  the  order  of  the  day."  This 
certainly  is  an  astonishing  display  of  magna- 
nimity !  Just  let  us  all  turn  Campbellites,  and 
adopt  their  notions  and  usages,  and  they  will 
graciously  receive  us,  and  admit  us  to  partici- 
pate in  their  exalted  privileges.  Then,  indeed, 
there  would  be  no  sects,  for  all  would  be  con- 
solidated into  one  sect.  But  after  all,  unless 
we  are  much  mistaken,  any  of  us  sectarians 
would  be  quite  willing  to  destroy  sectarianism 
on  precisely  the  same  principle. 

It  is  useless  to  pursue  this  view  of  the  sub- 
ject much  further.  A  child  may  see  the  gross 
absurdity  involved  in  the  anti-sectarian  claims 
of  Campbell  and  his  followers.  Indeed,  they 
have  more  bigotry  and  less  toleration,  than  in 
general  pertain  to  those  whom  they  condemn. 
For  the  latter,  while  they  choose  to  worship  God 


204  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

in  their  own  way,  are  ready  to  acknowledge  that 
they  may  be  mistaken  in  their  views  ;  and  not 
having  the  vanity  to  suppose  that  Christianity 
can  subsist  in  no  form  but  that  which  precisely 
accords  with  their  notions,  they  extend  the 
hand  of  fellowship  to  their  brethren  of  other 
denominations  ;  but  the  former  will  admit  no 
possible  error  upon  their  part,  and  will  have  no 
fellowship  with  those  who  cannot,  in  consci- 
ence, submit  to  their  arrogant  claims  and  non- 
sensical absurdities.  And  these  are  the  reno- 
vators of  the  age,  the  exclusive  christians  of  the 
19th  century  ;  without  one  particle  of  bigotry, 
intolerance,  or  sectarianism  ;  making  loud  pro- 
fessions of  love,  forbearance,  and  disinterested- 
ness, and  yet  denouncing  all  who  do  not  believe 
with  them,  and  virtually  saying,  "  We  are  the 
whole  and  only  church  of  Christ  ;  there  is  no 
salvation  out  of  our  communion  !"  Monstrous 
presumption  !  As  well  might  the  prince  of 
darkness  and  father  of  lies  claim  to  be  the 
fountain  of  light,  and  the  author  of  truth  and 
goodness. 

The  followers  of  Mr.  Campbell  professing  to 
be  guided  by  the  New  Testament  alone,  will 
not  acknowledge  any  man  as  their  leader,  nor 
consent  to  be  called  Campbellites.  And  strange 
as  it  may  appear,  their  disclaimers  in  relation 
to  these  matters,  form  no  inconsiderable  part  of 
the  "  reformation."  "  Others,"  say  they,  "  are 
the  followers  of  men.  Methodists  follow  Wes- 
ley, Presbyterians,  Calvin,  and  so  of  all  secta- 
rians ;  therefore,  they  are  not  the  followers  of 


^ 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  205 

Christ.  But  we  receive  no  man's  opinions, 
call  no  man  master ;  Paul  and  Peter  are  our 
teachers,  and  Christ  alone  our  guide." — And 
hence  to  be  called  the  followers  of  A.  Campbell, 
they  consider  a  reproach  upon  their  character, 
and  an  insult  to  their  dignity.  But  why  this 
sensitiveness  ?  If  Mr.  Campbell  be,  as  they 
seem  to  believe,  not  only  the  prodigy  of  the 
age,  but  "  the  greatest  and  best"  among  all  the 
men  who  have  visited  the  earth  since  the  apos- 
tles left  it,  is  it  either  sinful  or  discreditable  to 
receive  his  instructions,  and  be  called  his  fol- 
lowers ? — Certainly  not,  provided  his  instruc- 
tions comport  with  the  precepts  and  spirit  of 
the  gospel.  As  professors  of  Christianity,  it 
would  undoubtedly  be  criminal  for  us  to  follow 
any  man  in  doctrines  or  in  practices,  which  we 
considered  contrary  to  the  Scriptures  ;  but  not 
so,  if  after  a  careful  examination  we  are  con- 
vinced of  their  entire  agreement  with  the  letter 
and  spirit  of  the  Bible.  If  for  fear  of  being  call- 
ed the  followers  of  John  Wesley,  we  are  bound 
to  reject  those  views  of  the  doctrines  of  Christ 
which  he  taught,  though  fully  persuaded  of 
their  correctness,  we  have  no  alternative,  but 
the  most  downright  hypocrisy.  For  then  must 
we  reject  what  we  believe,  and  receive  what 
we  do  not  believe.  In  many  instances,  then, 
candor  and  honesty  compel  us  to  adopt  the 
opinions  of  some  uninspired  man ;  not,  how- 
ever, as  inspiration,  but  as  expressing  our  own 
understanding  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible. 
And  so  far  as  we  receive  his  opinions,  we  be- 
S 


206  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

come  his  followers.  And  where  is  the  sin  or 
shame  of  this  ?  Is  it  sinfnl  to  believe  with  great 
and  good  men — or  disreputable  to  confess  our- 
selves their  followers  ?  If  so,  sin  consists  in  the 
belief  of  the  truth,  and  reproach  in  calling  things 
by  their  right  names. 

There  is,  hov/ever,  but  little  difficulty  in  as- 
certaining the  motives  that  induce  the  "reform- 
ers" to  deny  their  proper  name ;  and  while  they 
almost  idolize  their  leader,  to  refuse  to  acknowl- 
edge him  as  such.  And  we  are  sorry  to  say, 
that  ambition  and  selfishness,  seem  to  have 
more  to  do  in  this  matter,  than  either  moral  or 
religious  principles.  We  have  no  intention  to 
"bring  a  railing  accusation"  againstthem.  Mr. 
Campbell  and  his  followers  may  be  entirely 
sincere.  We  hope  they  are.  But  it  cannot  be 
admitted  that  all  who  are  sincere  and  honest  in 
their  professions,  are  as  truly  simple  in  their 
motives.  Some  very  sincere  men  are  under 
the  influence  both  of  vanity  and  of  ambition. 
It  is  difficult  for  even  honest  men  always  to  un- 
derstand the  motives  that  govern  their  actions, 
"  for  the  heart  is  deceitful."  But  whatever  the 
motives  that  induce  Campbellites  to  deny  their 
name  and  their  leader,  the  obvious  tendency 
of  these  denials  has  been  to  dupe  the  unwary, 
and  thereby  to  form  a  new  party  in  religion, 
of  which  Mr.  Campbell  is  the  head  ;  and  by 
which  his  teachers  and  evangelists,  as  subalterns 
under  him,  have  obtained  a  little  factitious  no- 
toriety. When  claiming  to  have  no  leader  but 
our  Lord  and  Savior,  and  charging  Methodists, 


CABIPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  207 

and  others,  v/ith  being  the  followers  of  men, 
they  wish  to  make,  and  do  make  the  impression 
upon  ignorant  minds,  that  those  who  follow 
men,  and  receive  their  opinions,  cannot  be  the 
followers  of  Christ ;  and  that  there  is  an  essen- 
tial difference  between  Campbeilites  and  those 
whom  they  denounce  as  man-worshipers,  in  re- 
ference to  the  confidence  they  place  upon  the 
opinions  of  uninspired  men.  And  just  so  far 
as  these  impressions  are  produced,  does  dupli- 
city prevail  over  truth  and  candor.  There  is 
no  discrepancy  between  receiving  the  opinions 
of  men  in  their  expositions  of  Scripture,  and 
following  Christ  as  our  teacher  and  guide.  Did 
those  men  set  up  their  opinions  as  a  substitute 
for,  or  in  opposition  to  the  Word  of  God,  the 
case  would,  indeed,  be  different.  But  protes- 
tant  commentators  have  not  done  this.  After 
devoting  years  to  the  study  of  the  Scriptures, 
the  commentator  has  only  told  us  what  he  con- 
siders them  to  teach  ;  and  after  we  have  studied 
them  carefully,  and  are  convinced  that  his  opi- 
nions are  correct,  honesty  compels  us  to  adopt 
them,  and  thus  to  follow  him  "  who  through 
faith  and  patience  inherits  the  promises,"  while 
he  and  v/e  follow  Christ,  ^vho  "  is  all  in  all.'' 
But  still  we  shall  be  asked,  "  How  can  you  be 
followers  of  Christ,  and  of  uninspired  men  at 
the  same  time  ?  V/e  would  answer  this  ques- 
tion by  another :— How  can  I  be  a  citizen  of 
the  United  States  and  of  Kentucky  at  the  same 
time?  Do  you  say  there  is  no  difficulty  in  this, 
because  the  principles  of  the  state  government 


208  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

are  recognized  in  the  federal  constitution,  upon 
which  the  union  is  based.  Agreed ;  and  this 
may  serve  as  an  answer  to  the  first  question. 
There  is  no  more  difficulty  in  the  one  case, 
than  in  the  other. 

But  why  should  Campbellites  be  so  anxious 
to  unchristianize  those  who  adopt  the  opinions 
of  men,  and  become  their  followers  ?  In  so  do- 
ing, do  they  not  condemn  themselves  ?  Are 
they  not  as  deeply  involved  in  what  they  pro- 
nounce man-worship,  as  any  of  us  ?  Let  us  ex- 
amine the  testimony  of  facts — they  are  stubborn 
things,  and  sometimes  stand  very  much  in  the 
way  of  some  men's  professions.  Mr.  Camp- 
bell was  once  a  Baptist ;  and  when  he  com- 
menced his  "  reformation,"  not  only  stood  high 
among  them  as  a  man  of  talent,  but  to  a  con- 
siderable extent  had  their  confidence.  This 
circumstance  accounts  for  the  fact  that  most  of 
his  early  converts,  whether  teachers  or  private 
members,  were  proselytes  from  that  church. 
And  consequently,  they  had  not  only  professed 
their  belief  in  the  doctrines  of  the  church,  but 
according  to  her  requirements,  had  given  in 
their  experiences,  and  professed  to  be  regener- 
ated by  the  Holy  Spirit,  before  they  were  bap- 
tized. Before  these  could  embrace  the  "re- 
formation," they  had  to  change  their  opinions 
and  discard  their  religious  experiences.  But 
how  were  these  changes  effected  ?  By  the  New 
Testament?  Nay  ;  but  by  the  "  Christian  Bap- 
tist," and  the  "  Millennial  Harbinger,"  in  which 
Mr.  Campbell's  views  were  gradually  develop- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  209 

ed.  Here  they  were  taught  to  question,  and 
then  to  deny  a  Divine  call  to  the  ministry ;  to 
reject  tlie  influence  of  the  Spirit  in  turning  sin- 
ners to  God  ;  to  denounce  and  renounce  creeds 
and  sectarianism  ;  to  believe  that  the  Word  and 
Spirit  are  synonymous  ;  to  discard  all  christian 
experience  previous  to  baptism  ;  and  to  teach 
that  sins  can  only  be  pardoned  through  immer- 
sion. These,  with  many  other  absurdities,  in 
direct  opposition  to  their  previously  avowed 
sentiments,  they  readily  received,  and  pronounc- 
ed the  "  ancient  gospel !"  It  will  never  do  to 
say  they  gathered  all  this  from  the  New  Tes- 
tament ;  because  many  of  them  had  been  mi- 
nisters of  the  Baptist  church  for  years,  of  course 
they  were  familiar  with  the  Scriptures,  which 
they  tell  us  are  so  plain  that  a  child  of  ten  years 
old  may  understand  them.  But  during  all  that 
time  they  had  made  none  of  these  discoveries. 
On  the  contrary,  up  to  the  moment  that  Mr. 
Campbell  discovered  his  new  light,  and  invent- 
ed "another  gospel,"  they  had  contended  for 
a  call  to  the  ministry,  and  for  regeneration  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  as  necessarily  preceding  bap- 
tism, and  often  recited  their  own  experiences  in 
proof  or  confirmation  of  these  doctrines.  But 
\no  sooner  did  they  find,  that  Mr.  Campbell  had 
no  fellowship  for  such  doctrines,  tlian  they  re- 
nounced them  too,  and  even  renounced  their 
own  experiences — some  of  them  marvelous 
enough  in  all  conscience — which  they  had  been 
in  the  habit  of  detailing  for  years,  giving  the 
time,  place,  and  manner  of  their  conversion ; 
s2 


210  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

but  now  they  discovered  all  this  to  be  mysti- 
cism, enthusiasm,  and  nonsense.  And  yet 
these  men  tell  us,  they  place  no  dependence  on 
men's  opinions — they  are  not  the  followers  of 
Mr,  Campbell.  We  doubt  whether  a  more  pal- 
pable absurdity  has  been  attempted  to  be  palm- 
ed upon  the  world,  since  the  fable  of  transub- 
stantiation  was  invented. 

It  is  well  known,  that  for  the  last  eight  or 
nine  years  Mr.  Campbell  has  had  a  party  of 
followers  in  the  west,  who  have  sat  at  his  feet, 
and  read  his  periodicals,  till  they  have  adopted 
his  opinions  as  thoroughly  as  ever  one  man  did 
those  of  another.  His  proclaimers  have  been 
the  constant  endorsers  and  regular  reporters  of 
his  opinions.  What  he  taught  in  his  pamphlets, 
they  conned  over,  and  handed  out  to  their  hear- 
ers as  the  "  ancient  gospel ;"  and  thus  every 
article  of  their  creed  has  been  derived  from  him. 
It  is  true,  that  some  of  them  have  occasionally 
missed  the  track.  Whether  this  was  owing  to 
their  inability  to  comprehend  him,  or  to  his 
having  been  favored  with  some  new  light  vary- 
ing from  the  revelation  of  the  preceding  month, 
we  know  not ;  but  in  such  cases,  we  believe, 
they  have  manifested  every  reasonable  respect 
for  their  master,  by  tacking  about,  and  pursu- 
ing the  right  course  so  soon  as  he  has  pointed 
it  out.  After  having  witnessed  their  servility 
in  copying  the  sayings  and  doings  of  their  lea- 
der, some  have  imagined  that  he  could  write 
nothing  too  absurd  for  them  to  swallow.  An 
old  gentleman  once  remarked,  "  If  Mr.  Camp- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  211 

bell  were  to  declare  that  eating  rye  straw  would 
take  men  to  heaven,  his  followers  would  try  to 
do  it."  We  shall  not  endorse  this  opinion ;  we 
think  it  somewhat  doubtful.  But  if  there  be  a 
sect  in  America  that  follow  their  leader  more 
closely  than  Mr.  Campbell's  party  endeavor  to 
follow  him,  we  have  yet  to  make  the  discovery. 
This  we  do  know,  that  many  have  evinced  a  de- 
votedness  to  his  opinions,  almost  justifying  the 
conclusion  that  they  consider  him  infallible  ;  for 
whatever  he  has  written,  they  have  appeared 
ready  to  receive  and  pronounce  gospel  truth, 
though  in  direct  opposition  to  their  previously 
avowed  sentiments.  In  confirmation  of  this, 
we  could  relate  a  number  of  circumstances, 
some  of  which  came  under  our  own  notice. 
Take  the  following  as  a  specimen  :  When  the 
first  extra  number  of  the  Millennial  Harbinger, 
developing  fully  Mr.  Campbell's  method  of  re- 
mitting sins  through  immersion,  was  published, 
a  somewhat  humorous  gentleman,  in  a  village 
in  this  state,  got  hold  of  it  and  read  it  before 
it  had  been  circulated  among  his  Campbellite 
neighbors.  Resolving  to  try  an  experiment,  he 
put  the  pamphlet  in  his  pocket,  and  walked  to 
a  shop,  where  the  "  reformers"  of  the  village 
were  in  the  habit  of  meeting  to  enlighten  each 
other ;  and  finding  several  of  them  together,  he 
listened  awhile  to  their  conversation,  and  then 
with  seeming  carelessness,  remarked,  "I  un- 
derstand that  Mr.  Campbell  has  come  out  plain- 
ly and  declared  immersion  alone  to  be  the  act 
of  turning  to  God."     They  at  once  replied, 


212  CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED. 

*'  This  is  another  sectarian  misrepresentation — 
Mr.  Campbell  says  no  such  thing."  "  But," 
said  the  gentleman,  "  suppose  he  should  say 
this,  would  you  still  adhere  to  him  ?"  "  No," 
said  they,  "  if  he  were  to  take  this  ground,  we 
could  not  go  with  him  ;  for  the  New  Testament 
teaches  no  such  doctrine."  The  way  being 
thus  prepared,  the  extra  was  produced,  and  se- 
veral sentences  read,  the  last  of  which  was, 
"  Immersion  alone  was  that  act  of  turning  to 
God."  The  "  reformers"  were  silent  for  a 
moment ;  they  took  the  pamphlet,  turned  to  the 
title  page,  it  was  really  the  Millennial  Harbin- 
ger, published  by  A.  Campbell ;  they  turned 
back  to  the  passage  that  had  been  read,  re-read 
it,  mused  a  while  longer,  and  at  last  one  re- 
marked, "  Why,  this  is  just  what  I  always  be- 
lieved," and  so  said  they  all.  Now  let  not  the 
reader  be  startled  at  this  inconsistency,  and 
charge  them  with  falsehood.  They  were,  we 
verily  believe,  honest  men  ;  but  so  blindly  in- 
fatuated with  their  leader,  that  he  conducted 
them  whithersoever  he  chose,  without  their  be- 
ing aware  of  their  mental  servitude,  or  of  the 
ridiculous  attitudes  in  which  it  was  placing 
them.  And  although  we  do  not  suppose  that 
every  Campbellite  has  manifested  the  same 
blind  obedience,  we  do  believe  the  above  is  a 
pretty  fair  specimen  of  the  general  devotion  of 
that  party,  to  the  views  of  their  leader.  The 
Alpha  and  the  Omega  of  their  creed  came  from 
his  pen.  With  some  truths  which  they  might 
have   learned   from  the  Bible,  he  has  taught 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  213 

them  many  errors  which  they  never  did,  and 
never  could  have  gathered  from  that  source. 
And  while  they  have  hesitated  to  express  an 
opinion  upon  doctrines  in  dispute  upon  which 
he  had  not  pronounced,  we  have  generally  found 
them  ready  to  receive  his  opinions,  so  soon  as 
they  were  made  known,  and  incorporate  them 
as  a  part  of  the  "  ancient  gospel."  With  these 
facts  before  him,  the  reader  may  determine 
whether  they  are,  or  are  not  the  followers  of 
A.  Campbell. 

Connected  with  this  view  of  the  subject  is 
the  use  of  party  names.     We  have  previously 
{remarked    that  the    "reformers"  refuse  to  be 
j  called  Campbellites,  and  consider  the  name  a 
reproach ;   but  since  they   adopt  his   peculiar 
I  views,  and  arrange  themselves  under  the  ban- 
ner he  has  set  up,  is  it  not  clear  that  this  is  their 
legitimate    name?    "No,"    says    Barton    W. 
Stone,  "  for  this  would  argue  that  the  parties 
j  in  the  Corinthian  church  should  have  been  call- 
ed Paulites  and  Peterites,  which  the   apostle 
I  condemned."     But  really,  we  must  protest  a- 
j  gainst  placing  Mr.  Campbell,  or  any  other  un- 
I  inspired  man,  with  Paul  and  Peter.     We  had 
j  suspected,  even  before  we  learned,  that  one  of 
tthe  "  reformers"  had  prayed  the  Lord  to  bless 
iMr.  Campbell,  "the  second  Redeemer f^  that 
j  some  of  them  considered  him  a  little  superior 
jto  the  aposries  ;  but  with  due  deference  to  their 
partialities   we   must   demur  to  crowning  him 
ivith  any  such  honors.     Paul  and  Peter  did  not 
breach  to  explain  what   they  considered   the 


214  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

New  Testament  to  teach.     They  were  mspir- 
ed,  and  as  to  doctrines,  spoke  the  same  things, 
being  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost.     Their  doc- 
trines  could  not  have  raised  difterent  parties, 
because  their  doctrines  did  not  differ ;  conse- 
quently, parties  taking  their  names,  must  have 
based  their  existence  upon  personal  partialities, 
which  would,  indeed,  have  been   a  species  of 
man- worship.     Their  business  was  to  establish 
Christianity,  and  furnish  the   church  with  the 
doctrines  of  Christ  for  future  generations.    But 
now  the  case  is  altered.     Christianity  is  estab- 
lished, the  New  Testament  completed,  and  the 
name  of  Christ,  so  well  known  in  the  earth, 
that   all  his  followers  are  called  christians  as  a 
matter  of  course.     Christian  teachers  do  not 
now  come,  as  did  the  apostles,  to  make  known 
the  will  of  God  to  man  ;  but,  according  to  their 
understanding  of  it,  to  expound  that  will  as  pre- 
viously given.     In  doing  which,  they  arrive  at 
conclusions  somewhat  different ;  and  hence  dif- 
ferent sects  and  names.     And  then,  here  comes 
Mr.  Campbell,  differing,  not  m-ore  from  other 
sectarians,  than   from    Jesus    Christ    and  the 
apostles ;  and  his  followers  refuse  to  be  called 
Carapbellites,  because  there  were  no  Paulites 
and  Cephasites  in  the  Corinthian  church.    Be- 
fore this  argument  can  have  any  weight,  they 
must  prove  that  their  leader  sustains  the  same 
relation  to  the  church  and  the  world,  that  the 
apostles  did.     When  this  is  done  we  shall  ad- 
mit that  the  position  may  be  tenable. 

After  all,  we  expect  to  hear  it  said,  "'Your 


'i 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  215 

party  names  show  that  you  are  not  Christ's  ; 
for  how  can  you  be  christians,  while  you  are 
called  Methodists,  Baptists,  and  Presbyterians  '' 
This  kind  of  stuff'  we  have  frequently  heard, 
and  are  aware  that  it  has  had  some  influence  in 
making  proselytes  to  Campbellism,  though  we 
can  scarcely  conceive  it  possible  thai  it  could 
affect  any  but  weak  minds.  "  I'll  prove," 
said  a  certain  notorious  "  reformer,"  "  that  you 
are  not  a  christian."  "  Indeed,"  said  the  per- 
son addressed,  "  where  is  your  proof?"  "  Why, 
you  are  a  Methodist,  and  can  have  no  claims  to 
the  name  of  christian."  "  Very  well,"  replied 
the  other,  "  but  by  the  same  argument  I  will 
prove  that  your  leader  is  not  a  man.  Is  not 
his  name  Campbell  ?"  "  Well,  what  of  that  ?" 
"  Only,  sir,  that  as  your  own  position  will  al- 
low him  but  one  name,  he  can  have  no  right  to 
the  appellation  of  Campbell,  and  to  that  of  man 
at  the  same  time."  The  "  reformer"  was  silent, 
and  well  he  might  be,  for  unquestionably  the 
argument  was  as  good  in  the  latter  case  as  in 
the  former.  As  men  multiplied,  it  became  ne- 
cessary, for  the  sake  of  distinction,  to  give 
them  family  names  ;  and  the  same  cause  produc- 
ed a  like  result  in  the  church  of  Christ.  But 
while  the  whole  human  family  are  known  by 
the  general  name  of  man,  there  is  no  inconsis- 
tency in  distinguishing  them  by  the  appellations 
of  their  nations  or  families  ;  nor  does  it  involve 
the  least  difficulty  to  apply  to  each  christian 
sect  that  name  by  which  custom  has  designated 


216  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

it,  while  all  are  known  by  the  universal  name 
of  christian. 

But  is  it  possible  that  those  who  make  all 
this  noise  about  names,  can  be  so  ignorant  as 
not  to  see  their  inconsistency  ?     If  they  called 
themselves   Christians,  and  nothing  else,  their 
position,  though  still  untenable,  would  appear 
much  more  graceful.     But  the  truth  is,  they 
are  not  agreed  among  themselves,  upon   this 
point ;  and  hence  we  find  them  giving  currency 
to  different  names,  some  of  which  areas  foreign 
from  the  sanctions  of  Scripture,  as  those  of  any 
other  sectarians.     No  doubt  the  reason  of  this 
is,  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  been  rather  at  a  loss 
to  ascertain  what  name  would  please  him  best. 
Some  years   ago,  he   informed  them  that  het 
would  prefer  the  name  of  Christian,  but  for  the 
fact  that  it  had  been   prostituted   to   sectarian 
purposes.     We  believe  he  then  hinted  some- 
thing about  their  taking  the  name  of  Disciples, 
also  that  of  "  Reformers  ;"  but  did  not  come 
out  fully,  or  determine  upon  either.    However 
this  may  be,  we  do  know  that  his  followers 
have  had  some  difficulty  in  finding  out  their 
own  name  ;  that  some  have  decided  to  be  called 
Reformers,  and  others.  Disciples ;  while  that 
portion  that  had  been  inducted  into  the  "  reform- 
ation" from  the  old  stock  of  Newlightism,  have 
generally  preferred  the  name  of  Christians.  But 
amid  all  this  the  common  consent  of  surround- 
ing spectators  has  dubbed  them  with  the  cog- 
nomen of  their  founder  and  leader,  their  iegi- 


CAMPEELLISM    EXPOSED.  217 

timate  and  proper  name,  and  from  this  decision 
there  is  no  appeal. 

We  can  by  no  means  submit  to  the  task  of 
pursuing  this  topic  further.  What  other  names 
beside  those  mentioned  above  may  be  cui-rent 
among  them,  we  know  not,  nor  is  it  important. 
Upon  this  subject,  as  well  as  upon  all  those 
points  of  doctrine,  upon  which  the  Bishop  of 
Bethany  has  not  come  out,  nothing  is  settled — 
nothing  is  tangible.  Nor,  indeed,  have  we  any 
assurance  that  a  solitary  article  of  the  Bishop's 
creed  is  permanently  fixed.  His  course  here- 
tofore, has  been  the  antipodes  of  consistency. 
That  man  who  has  veered  round  through  every 
point  of  the  compass,  from  frigid  Antinomian- 
ism  to  semi-pelagianism,  may  certainly  be  sus- 
pected of  a  liability  to  change  again  ;  and  espe- 
cially when  he  professes  to  have  no  written 
creed.  But  the  party  that  is  headed  by  such  a 
leader  have  one  advantage.  They  can  fly  where 
they  please,  and  thus  evade  responsibility.  We 
never  know  where  to  find  them.  It  is  true,  if 
we  should  have  read  the  last  number  of  the 
Millennial  Harbinger,  we  may  know  how  to 
take  them  to-day,  but  we  can  have  no  assurance 
of  finding  them  in  the  same  attitude  a  month 
hence ;  inasmuch  as  it  is  more  than  probable, 
that  the  next  number  will  come  surcharged  with 
some  new  light,  diverse  from  that  which  pre- 
ceded. And  these  are  the  persons  who  point 
the  finger  of  scorn  at  their  brethren,  and  cry 
out  creeds,  sectarianism,  man-worship ;  who 
inichristianize  the  world,  and  make  their  boast 
10  T 


218  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

of  an  exclusive  knowledge  of  the  gospel.  With 
little  hesitation,  we  venture  to  prognosticate, 
that  not  a  few  of  them  will  hold  on  their  way 
until  they  have  cast  away  the  last  tattered  rem- 
nant of  the  "  faith  delivered  to  the  saints." — 
No  distant  day  may  see  them  enrolled  upon  the 
annals  of  infidelity,  as  beacons  of  warning  to 
all  who  are  beginning  to  worship  the  fond  con- 
ceits of  their  own  minds,  or  those  of  their 
leader's.  This  is  what  we  fear  ;  not  what  we 
desire.  "We  would  fain  hope — nay,  we  do  hope 
better  things  of  many  of  them.  Some  we  be- 
lieve are  simple  hearted,  sincere,  and  not  des- 
titute of  piety.  Such  we  sincerely  pity.  They 
have  been  bewildered  and  led  astray  ;  and  may 
we  not  indulge  the  hope  that  they  are  not  des- 
tined to  "  wax  worse  and  worse  ;"  but  to  be^ 
brought  to  think  upon  their  ways,  and  to  turn  * 
their  feet  again  to  the  path  of  the  Divine  Tes 
timonies  ? 


h 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  219 


CHAPTER  VII. 

CALL  TO  THE  MINISTRY. 

Unchristian  sneers  of  Mr.  Campbell  on  this  subject — a 
call  defined— evangelical  christians  substantially  agreed 
on  this  point — the  true  call  lays  no  claims  to  inspi- 
ration or  miraculous  gifts — such  a  call  possible — ne- 
cessarj'- — prevailed  in  the  primitive  church — and  has 
not  ceased — objections  answered — mischievous  ten- 
dency of  Mr.  Campbell's  doctrine. 

We  have  commenced  a  new  subject,  but  de- 
sign to  despatch  it  in  less  time  than  has  been  de- 
voted to  either  of  the  preceding  topics.  Inde- 
pendent of  the  pending  controversy,  the  subject 
'Of  the  ministerial  call  is  one  of  deep,  absorbing 
interest  to  thousands,  if  not  to  christians  univer- 
j  sally ;  and  we  hope  that  some  remarks  upon  it 
may  be  profitable  in  more  ways  than  one. 

In  reference  to  this  matter,  we  believe  that 
Mr.  Campbell  has  done  much  injury  to  the  cause 
of  Christianity.  Upon  the  call  to  the  ministry, 
we  read  various  articles  from  his  pen,  some 
years  ago,  but  made  no  extracts  ;  and  having  at 
present,  no  access  to  his  writings,  we  shall  not 
be  able  to  state  his  views  in  his  own  words.  It 
is  known,  however,  that  here  he,  professedly 
stands  in  opposition  to  the  christian  world.  Of 
his,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  upon  the  mind  of 
my  one  who  has  been  conversant  with  the  wril- 
ngs  of  Mr.  Campbell,  the  harangues  of  his  pro- 


220  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED 


claimers,  or  the  operations  of  his  "reformation." 
The  sneering  manner  in  which  they  have  uni- 
formly treated  this  subject,  and  their  constant 
and  reckless  denunciation  of  the  "  called  and 
sent,"  cannot  but  have  convinced  every  attentive 
observer,  that  they  profess  to  stand  in  direct  op- 
position to  those  who  claim  a  Divine  call  to  the 
ministry.  The  truth  of  this  statement-^their 
professing  to  occupy  an  opposite  position  to  the 
"called  and  sent"-Campbellites  themselves,  will 
not  deny.  Indeed  they  cannot ;  for  it  forms  one 
article  of  their  creed,  was  issued  from  their 
head  quarters,  and  the  world  knows,  they  havef 
universally  practiced  upon  it.  This  being  suffi- 
cient for  our  present  purpose,  we  proceed. 

Upon  this  subject,  as  well  as  upon  many  oth- 
ers, there  may  be  some  diversity  of  opinioi^^ 
among  evangelical  christians  ;  but  they  are  gen 
erally,  and  perhaps  entirely  agreed,  that  the  pre 
rogative  of  selecting  the  ministers  of  the  church 
belongs  to  God.  That  this  was  the  case  under 
the  former  dispensation,  none  will  question. 
Aaron,  his  sons,  and  the  whole  tribe  of  Levi, 
were,  by  Divine  appointment,  consecrated  to  the 
priestly  office  ;  and  Moses,  David,  and  all  the 
prophets  derived  their  authority  to  declare  the 
counsels  of  the  Almighty  from  the  same  source. 
We  discover  the  same  principle  in  operation  at  ;l 
the  opening  of  the  gospel  dispensation.  The 
first  disciples  were  called  by  our  Lord  in  person, 
and  by  himself  commissioned  to  preach  the  gos- 
pel, first  to  the  Jews,  and  then  to  the  whole 
world.     And  subsequently,  St.  Paul,  though  in  ji 


Ml 

1' 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  221 

a  different  manner,  was  called  and  sent  by  the 
same  authority.  With  regard  to  this,  we  have 
no  controversy,  even  with  Campbellites.  The 
point  at  issue  is,  whether  the  Almighty  exercises 
the  same  prerogative  in  calling  men  to  tlie  min- 
istry now,  that  he  did  in  the  days  of  the  apostles. 
We  believe  he  does ;  but  before  we  enter  upon 
the  proof,  it  may  be  necessary  to  state  what  we 
mean  by  said  call. 

This  may  be  simply  de-fined  as  a  conviction 
of  duty.  The  subject  of  it  beholds  the  world 
lying  in  wickedness,  sees  sinners  carelessly 
pursuing  the  road  to  ruin,  and  becomes  anxious- 
ly desirous  of  their  salvation.  And  if  to  this  be 
added,  a  firm  persuasion  that  duty  requires  him 
to  warn  them  of  their  danger,  and  invite  them 
gj^o  the  Savior  of  sinners  ;  and  if  this  impression 
l^e  such  as  to  create  restlessness  and  a  sense  of 
guilt,  when  pursuing  any  ordinary  occupation, 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  work  of  the  ministry,  it 
is  presumable  he  is  called  to  this  work.  All 
this,  however,  is  evidence  only  to  himself. 
Something  further  is  necessary  to  satisfy  the 
church  of  the  reality  of  his  call,  and  thus  to 
open  the  way  for  his  engaging  in  the  work. 
It  would  certainly  be  dangerous  to  the  welfare 
of  any  church,  for  her  to  give  indiscriminate 
license  for  all  to  preach  who  profess  to  consid- 
er it  their  duty  ;  for  some  of  these  may  be  labor- 
ing under  a  delusion  of  their  own  imaginations, 
and  totally  disqualified  for  the  work ;  while  oth- 
ers may  be  hypocrites,  and  fit  only  to  become 
ministers  of  Satan.  Hence,  all  churches  have 
T  2 


222  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

some  method  of  proving  those  who  claim  to  be 
called  to  the  ministry.  The  evidence  that  satis- 
fies the  Methodist  Episcopal  church  of  the  reali- 
ty of  this  call  is  the  existence  of  three  marks, 
viz  :  "  grace,"  "gifts,"  and  "fruit,"  or  useful- 
ness. Whether  these  do,  or  do  not  exist,  the 
church,  and  those  vvliose  province  it  is  to  license 
him,  may,  to  a  good  degree,  determine.  "  And 
so  long  as  these  three  marks  concur  in  any  one, 
we  believe  he  is  called  of  God  to  preach."  But 
if  these  are  not  found,  he  is  not  received ;  and 
this  circumstance,  if  he  is  humble  and  conside- 
rate, will  lead  him  to  conclude  either  that  he  ^ 
has  mistaken  his  caUing,  or  that  the  time  has 
not  arrived  for  him  to  enter  upon  the  work;  for 
the  Providence  of  God  will  surely  prepare  the 
way  before  him  whom  he  has  selected  to  labo^|M||| 
in  his  vineyard.  But  if  the  above  mentioneflBH 
three  marks  are  found  to  concur  in  the  applicant,  ^' 
the  church  authorities  do  not  hesitate  to  autho- 
rize him  to  preach  ;  and  thus  his  convictions 
concerning  the  path  of  duty  are  confirmed  ;  and 
in  after  life,  the  fruit  of  his  labor  tends  to 
strengthen  and  establish  him  in  the  work. 

These  are  the  views  of  our  own  denomination, 
in  reference  to  the  ministerial  call ;  and  so  far 
as  we  know,  our  brethren  of  other  denomina- 
tions, entertain,  substantially,  the  same  senti- 
ments. But  the  question  arises,  how  is  this 
conviction  of  duty  produced  ?  Who,  or  what 
is  its  author  ?  We  have  already  expressed  the 
belief  that  God  exercises  the  same  prerogative 
now,  in  calling  men  to  the  ministry,  that  he  did 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  233 

in  the  days  of  the  apostles  ;  and  we  will  add  our 
hearty  concurrence  in  the  views  of  the  church 
to  which  we  belong,  that  every  true  minister  of 
Jesus  Christ  "  is  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost" 
to  preach  the  gospel.  But  it  is  not  contended 
by  us,  nor  by  any  orthodox  church,  that  the 
modes  by  which  the  will  of  the  Almighty  is 
made  known  to  the  selected  individual,  are  the 
same  now  that  they  w^ere  in  former  ages.  That 
there  is,  in  some  respects,  a  difference  between 
them,  cannot,  for  a  moment,  be  doubted.  But 
this  concession  does  not  in  the  least,  militate 
against  the  opinion  that  the  call  is  still  Divine ; 
for  in  the  age  of  miracles,  men  were  not  always 
called  to  the  sacred  office  in  the  same  manner. 
While  the  will  of  God,  in  setting  apart  Aaron 
and  the  tribe  of  Levi,  was  made  known  through 
Moses,  that  will  in  relation  to  the  work  assign- 
ed to  Moses,  Samuel,  and  the  prophets,  was 
communicated  immediately  to  themselves  ;  and 
while  Peter  and  John,  and  the  rest  of  the 
eleven,  received  their  commission  from  the  lips 
of  the  Savior  before  his  ascension,  Saul  of  Tarsus 
was  afterwards  called  in  a  different  manner, 
though  none  the  less  effectual.  The  fact,  there- 
fore, that  a  change  in  the  manner  of  calling 
men  to  the  ministry  has  taken  place  since  the 
days  of  the  apostles,  is  no  argument  against  the 
reality  of  the  call.  It  is  no  longer  miraculous, 
but  it  is  still  Divine. 

The  ministerial  call,  as  believed  in,  and  un- 
derstood by  Protestant  christians,  lays  no  claim 
to  an  influence  of  ths  Spirit  amounting  to  inspi- 


224  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

ration,  in  its  primsry  sense,  nor  to  the  gift  of 
tongues,   or   the    power  of  working  miracles. 
These  belonged   exclusively  to  former  times, 
and  are  not  at  present  called  for.     Dreams  and 
visions,  extraordinary  and  unaccountable  impres- 
sions, and  the  hearing  of  voices,  constitute  no 
part  of  that  call  for  which  w^e  contend.     It  is 
admitted,  however,  that  some  modern  enthusi- 
asts, such  as  the  Irvingites  of  England,  and  the 
Mormonites  of  this  country,  have  pretended  to 
possess  these  extraordinary  powers  ;  and  it  may 
be  that  some  sincere  and  pious  persons  among 
the  regular  churches,  have  imagined  themselves 
called  to  engage  in  the  ministry,  by  visions  and 
by    audible,  supernatural  voices.       But   these 
imaginings,  the  offspring  of  weak  or  unsteady 
minds,  can  no  more  be  charged  upon  the  church- 
es where  they  may  have  occurred,  than  can 
Bishop  Rigdon's  folUes,  who  left  the  "  reforma- 
tion" for  Mormonism,  be  charged  upon  Bishop 
Campbell.     Certain  it  is,  that  the  sects  in  this 
country,  against  which  Mr.  Campbell's  philip- 
ics  have  been  directed,  do   not  give    counte- 
nance to  these  fables,  or  lay  claim  to  any  such 
extraordinary  powers.       We    have  mentioned 
these  things  because  "  reformers"  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  misrepresenting  our  views  upon  this 
subject.  Whether  from  ignorance  or  otherwise, 
we  know  not,  but  it  is  certain  their  usual  prac- 
tice has  been  to  represent  the   gift  of  tongues 
and  the  power  of  working  miracles  as  insepara- 
ble from  the  ministerial  call;  and  because  we 
believe  in  the  latter,  they  have  charged  us  with 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  225 

the  absurdity  and  folly  of  laying  claim  to  the 
former.  And  after  having  thus  reared  an  imagi- 
nary something,  which  no  sober  minded,  intelli- 
gent christian  in  modern  times,  ever  thought  of 
admitting  into  his  creed,  we  have  beheld  theni 
gravely  set  about  the  work  of  demolishing  it. 
But  the  folly  with  which  they  brand  us  is  the 
creature  of  their  own  brain.  It  has  never  dis- 
graced our  creeds,  and  we  trust  never  will. 
And  their  conduct  in  this  respect  may  be  well 
likened  to  that  of  the  juggler,  who  professes  to 
conjure  up  an  evil  spirit  that  he  may  have 
the  honor  and  the  profit  of  sending  it  back  to 
its  own  place,  and  thus  excite  the  astonishment 
of  his  credulous  auditory. 

We  defined  above  this  ministerial  call  as  be- 
ing a  conviction  of  duty,  wrought  by  the  Holy 
Ghost  in  the  heart  of  him  who  is  selected  for 
the  work,  so  as  to  render  it  dangerous  and  sin- 
ful for  Imn  to  refuse  to  engage  in  it  ;  but  not 
so  as  to  suppose  him  inspired,  in  the  ordinary 
sense  of  that  term,  or  endowed  with  miraculous 
gifts. 

The  possibility  of  men  being  thus  called, 
will  scarcely  be  questioned  by  any  one  who  be- 
lieves the  Bible,  and  seriously  considers  the 
tendency  of  such  a  position.  We  are  aware 
that  Mr.  Campbell's  ultraism  in  reference  to  the 
influence  of  the  Spirit,  assuming  that  men  can 
only  be  operated  upon  through  the  media  of 
words  or  signs,  would  render  that  call  to  the 
ministry  for  which  we  contend,  an  impossibili- 
ty ;  for  grant  this  position,  and  it  will  certainly 
10* 


226  GAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

follow,  that  the  Almighty,  without  the  inter- 
vention of  a  preternatural  voice,  or  something 
else  of  that  character,  could  call  no  man  to 
preach.  But  this  assumption  we  have  pre- 
viously examined  and  found  it  to  be  both  un- 
scriptural  and  unreasonable  ;  and  we  are  not 
prepared  to  believe  that  Mr.  Campbell  would 
have  adopted  it,  had  he  been  fully  aware  of  its 
tendency.  If  it  can  be  carried  out,  without 
landing  him  in  materialism,  we  are  much  mis- 
taken. To  suppose  it  impossible  for  that  pure 
and  omnipotent  Spirit  who  gave  man  his  being, 
to  have  immediate  intercourse  with  the  spirits  of 
his  creatures,  is  not  only  to  limit  his  power 
and  reject  his  Word,  which  plainly  teaches 
such  an  intercourse,  but  virtually  to  deny  the 
possibility  of  the  existence  of  spirit  separate 
from  matter,  a  consequence  so  entirely  hostile 
to  Christianity  that  every  sober  minded,  sincere 
Campbellite,  must  refuse  to  give  it  his  sanction. 
But  to  attempt  proof  here  is  not  necessary. 
Our  readers  will  at  once  see,  that  it  is  possible 
for  the  Almighty  by  his  Spirit  to  impress  upon 
the  minds  of  those  whom  he  designs  to  make 
his  ambassadors,  the  conviction  that  it  is  their 
duty  to  preach  the  Gospel,  while  by  his  provi- 
dence he  opens  the  way  for  them  to  engage  in 
this  important  work. 

That  there  is  now  as  great  a  necessity  for 
preaching  the  gospel,  as  there  was  at  any  for- 
mer period  of  the  church,  will  not,  perhaps,  be 
doubted.  At  any  rate,  all  will  admit  that  the 
gospel  should  be  preached.     But  who  are  to 


CAMPBELLI3M   EXPOSED.  237 

preach  it  ?  Men  who  are  called,  or  men  who 
are  not  called  ?  Those  who  consider  it  their 
duty,  or  those  who  do  not  consider  it  their  du- 
ty ?  Unquestionably  the  former  ;  for  if  Camp- 
bellites  or  others,  engage  in  preaching  or  pro- 
claiming, who  do  not  esteem  it  their  duty  to  do 
so,  they  are  acting  the  part  of  dishonest  hypo- 
crites ;  and  consequently,  doing  the  service  of 
Satan,  The  gospel  then  must  be  preached  by 
men  who  consider  it  their  duty  to  engage  in 
this  work.  And  here  the  question  of  the  apos- 
tle is  forcible,  "  How  shall  they  preach  except 
they  be  sent."  But  it  may  be  said  the  church 
is  to  send  them,  and  that'this  is  all  the  call  that 
is  required.  We  do  not  know,  indeed,  that 
Campbellites  will  admit  of  even  this  ;  for  we 
believe  it  to  be  a  part  of  their  economy  to  allow 
the  whole  fraternity,  male  and  female,  to  teach 
and  administer  the  ordinances,  just  as  seemeth 
good  in  their  own  eyes.  It  may  be,  however, 
that  in  certain  cases  they  consider  an  appoint- 
ment by  the  church  to  be  necessary.  And  here 
we  shall  not  disagree ;  for  we  formerly  ac- 
knowledged it  to  be  the  duty  of  the  church  to 
sanction,  and  showed  the  importance  of  minis- 
ters receiving  her  authority.  But  this  does  not 
supercede  the  necessity  of  a  higher  call.  For 
the  church  can  only  license  such  as  are  con- 
vinced that  duty  requires  them  to  preach  ;  and 
the  question  to  be  settled  is.  How  did  they  re- 
ceive this  conviction  ?  St.  Paul  tells  us,  that 
*'he  who  desires  the  office  of  a  bishop,  desires 
a  good  work  f^^  and  another  inspired  writer  as- 


228  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

sures  us  that   "  every    good  and  perfect  gift 
Cometh  down  from  the  Father  of  lights."    Now 
put  these  together,  and  we  have  the  irresistible 
conclusion  that  the  minister  of  Christ  receives 
his  convictions  of  duty,  and  his  desires  for  the 
work,  from  above  ;  and  consequently,  his  call 
is  divine.     In  confirmation  of  this,  let  it  be  re- 
membered that  the  Lord,  in  allusion  to  the  pre- 
sent dispensation,  promised,  by  Jeremiah,  to 
give  the  church  "  pastors  according  to  his  own 
heart,'"  in  which  he  undoubtedly  claimed  the 
privilege  of  selecting  his  own  ministers.     And 
in  perfect  agreement  with  the  above,  is  the  di- 
rection of  our  Lord  to  his  followers.     "  Pray 
ye  the  Lord  of  the  harvest  that  he  would  send 
forth  laborers  into  his  harvest."     Now  such  a 
prayer    as  this   upon    Campbellite    principles, 
would  certainly  amount  to  a  solemn  mockery. 
What !  pray  to  the  Lord  to  do  that  which  he  will 
have  no  hand  in  doing  ?  which  he  has  left  to  the 
discretion  of  the  church,  or  to  the  whim  of  each 
individual  member  ?    No  indeed  ;  such  a  prayer 
would  be  too  much  like  that  of  the  fabled  wag- 
oner, and  no  consistent  Campbellite  would  pre- 
sume to  offer  it.     His  plan  would  be  to  advise 
the  church  to  make  such  selections  from  among 
the  members  as  she  should  see  fit,  and  send 
them  out  into  the  field,  or  to  leave  the  harvest 
for  every  novice  to  thrust   in  his  sickle,  and 
spoil  and  destroy  the    grain   at   his    pleasure. 
But  this  method  of  making  ministers  is  of  mod- 
ern invention  ;  not  dating  so  far  back  as  the  days 
of  Jesus  Christ,  or  his  apostles.     The  "  J^ord 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  229 

of  the  harvest"  did  not  advise  his  followers  to 
select  such  young  men  as  they  should  consider 
pious,  and  send  thein  to  college  that  they  might 
learn  to  preach,  nor  to  select  and  send  out  such 
as  they  might  consider  already  to  have  a  suita- 
ble education  ;  but  to  pray  to  Him,  whose  pro- 
vince it  is  to  select  his  own  ambassadors,  that 
He  would  send  them  forth  into  his  vineyard. 
And  if  such  a  command  does  not  necessarily 
imply  that  every  true  minister  of  Christ  is 
called  of  God,  and  "  moved  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,"  to  preach  the  gospel,  it  will,  we  pre- 
sume, be  extremely  difficult  to  find  that  it  means 
any  thing. 

But  Mr.  Campbell  will  tell  us,  that  the  im- 
pression as  to  the  path  of  duty,  of  which  we 
have  spoken,  may  be  produced  by  various  nat- 
ural means,  without  supposing  any  divine  agen- 
cy, that  reading,  conversation,  attending  the 
preaching  of  the  Word,  or  the  casual  remarks 
of  a  parent,  may  serve  to  fix  the  notion  of 
preaching  upon  the  mind  of  his  youthful  son, 
which  in  process  of  time  ripens  in  the  firm  con- 
viction that  he  is  called  to  the  work.  That 
any,  or  all  these  may  be  used  as  secondary 
causes  in  effecting  the  object  under  considera- 
tion, we  have  no  disposition  to  question  ;  for 
this  is  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  idea  of  a 
call  from  above.  God  ordinarily  works  by 
means,  he  alone  it  is,  that  justifies  and  sancti- 
fies the  sinner,  and  yet  he  has  ordained  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel,  and  various  other 
means  to  promote  the  salvation  of  souls.  The 
U 


230  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

Lord  Jesus  could  have  given  the  blind  man 
sight  by  a  word,  but  he  chose  to  make  use  of 
clay  and  spittle,  and  then  to  send  him  to  the 
pool  of  Siloam  that  he  might  wash  and  see. 
But  the  use  of  these  means  did  not  render  the 
cure  any  the  less  the  effect  of  Divine  power  ; 
nor  does  the  intervention  of  means,  in  fixing 
upon  the  mind  an  impression  of  the  duty  of 
preaching  the  gospel,  militate  in  the  least 
against  the  idea  that  the  Holy  Ghost  is  the 
prime  mover  and  instigator  to  that  work. 

And  is  there  not,  in  the  very  nature  of  things, 
a  necessity  for  the  appointment  of  the  ministers 
of  the  church,  by  Divine  authority  ?  This  ne- 
cessity certainly  did  exist  in  former  times,  and 
appointments  were  made  accordingly.  Hence, 
the  Levites  were  consecrated  to  the  duties  of 
the  sanctuary,  under  the  Mosaic  dispensation  ; 
and  hence,  the  apostles  were  commissioned  to 
preach  the  gospel  and  administer  the  ordinan- 
ces at  the  opening  of  the  christian  era.  These 
appointments  were  all  by  Divine  authority. 
And  is  the  church  of  God  of  less  consequence 
under  the  christian  dispensation,  than  it  was 
under  the  Jewish  ?  Does  it  not  require  as 
much  of  his  fostering  care  now  as  it  did  in  the 
days  of  Paul  and  Peter  ?  Men  are  still  requir- 
ed, whose  business  it  shall  be  to  preach  the 
gospel  and  administer  the  sacraments — work  to 
which  the  apostles  were  specially  appointed  by 
the  Head  of  the  church — and  surely  we  are  au- 
thorized to  infer  that  the  same  wisdom  and  au- 
thority are  still  necessary  in  selecting  and  ap- 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  231 

pointing  those  who  are  to  discharge  these  im- 
portant duties. 

That  this  principle  prevailed  in  the  church 
during  the  time  that  the  inspired  writers  have 
furnished  us  with  its  history,  will  not  admit  of 
a  doubt.  Subsequently  to  the  commissioning 
of  the  eleven,  Paul  and  Barnabas  received  au- 
thority from  the  same  source,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  required  them  to  be  separated  for  the 
work  whereunto  he  had  called  them.  The  el- 
ders of  Ephesus  received  their  commissions  in 
like  manner  ;  for  St.  Paul  commanded  them 
"  to  feed  the  church  of  God,"  over  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  had  made  them  overseers.  And 
we  may  safely  infer  that  all  the  early  preachers, 
whether  apostles,  elders,  deacons,  or  teachers, 
derived  their  authority  from  the  same  Almighty 
power.  This,  indeed,  cannot  be  disputed. 
Even  Campbellites  admit  the  Divine  authority 
of  the  apostles  ;  but  tell  us  that  that  authority 
was  not  extended  beyond  the  first  age  of  Chris- 
tianity. But  this  remains  to  be  proved,  and  if 
it  were  established,  it  would  prove  too  much  ; 
for  the  authority  to  administer  baptism,  being 
inseparably  connected  with  the  call  to  the  min- 
istry, the  latter  cannot  be  disannulled,  without 
abrogating  the  former.  The  Savior  after  his 
resurrection,  said  to  his  disciples,  "  Go  ye, 
therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  and  in  thus  commission- 
ing them  to  preach  his  gospel,  he  instituted  the 
ordinance  of  christian  baptism,  and  authorised 


233  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

and  commanded  them  to  administer  it.  It  is, 
therefore,  clear  that  the  call  to  the  ministry  and 
the  right  to  baptize,  are  so  united  that  they 
jnust  stand  or  fall  together  ;  and  hence  that  ar- 
gument which  goes  to  confine  the  ministerial 
call  to  the  apostolic  age,  will  have  the  same  ef- 
fect upon  the  authority  to  administer  baptism, 
and  prove  that  the  world  has  had  neither 
preachers  nor  ordinances  for  the  last  seventeen 
centuries. 

We  are  aware  that  Campbellism  proceeds 
upon  the  supposition  that  every  convert  made 
by  the  apostles,  was  permitted  to  turn  baptizer. 
But  this  is  assumption,  and  not  proof.  Mr. 
C^npbell,  indeed,  has  labored  hard  to  prove  it: 
but  with  all  the  tortures  to  which  his  ingenuity 
has  subjected  the  subtilties  of  sophistry,  he  has 
not  been  able  to  adduce  from  the  'New  Testa- 
ment, either  precept  or  example  in  favor  of  ' 
baptism  by  laymen.  Nor  is  this  at  all  aston-  . 
isHing,  for  that  book  contains  no  evidence  that 
any  individual,  not  called  of  God  to  the  work 
of  the  ministry,  ever  did  administer  baptism. 
Mr.  Campbell  may  presume  and  suppose  what 
he  pleases,  and  his  followers  may  assist  him 
with  their  own  imaginings  for  aught  we  care  ; 
but  a  thousand  of  their  suppositions  will  not 
make  one  Bible  truth.  The  proof  is  what  we 
require  ;  and  that  can  never  be  given.  But  on 
the  contrary,  we  have  certain  knowledge,  not 
only  that  the  authority  to  preach  and  baptize, 
was  originally  given  by  the  great  Head  of  the 
church  to  the  same  individuals,  but  that  this 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  233 

practice  continued  down  to  the  close  of  the  New 
Testament  history  of  the  church  ;  and  that  we 
have  no  conclusive  evidence  of  baptism  having 
been  performed  by  laymen,  till  that  darkness  and 
superstition  began  to  overspread  the  church, 
which  gave  birth  to  Mr.  Campbell's  fundamen- 
tal error  that  baptism  is  essential  to  salvation. 
We,  may,  therefore,  safely  infer  that  the  notion 
that  all  christians  have  equal  authority  to 
administer  the  ordinances,  has  no  other  founda- 
tion than  mere  human  opinion.  And  hence, 
we  repeat,  that  any  argument  which  shall  prove 
the  call  to  the  ministry  to  have  ceased  with  the 
apostles,  will  prove  that  all  authority  to  bap- 
tize shared  the  same  fate  ;  and  as  baptism  is 
the  initiating  rite,  it  must  follow  that  there  is  at 
present,  no  visible  church  upon  earth. 

The  limits  assigned  to  the  investigation  of 
the  present  topic,  admonish  us  that  further  re- 
marks in  proof  of  the  perpetuation  of  a  Divine- 
ly constituted  ministry  to  preach  the  Gospel, 
and  administer  the  ordinances  of  the  church, 
must  be  suspended.  And  indeed,  we  consid- 
er the  proof  already  given,  as  abundantly  suffi- 
cient ;  for  though  we  occupy  the  affirmative  of 
the  question,  the  circumstances  of  the  case  are 
such  as  to  throw  the  necessity  of  furnishing 
proof  entirely  upon  our  opponents.  We  have 
seen  that  a  divinely  constituted  ministry  did 
once  exist — that  the  original  apostles  and  after 
them  Paul  and  Barnabas,  Silas  and  Philip,  and 
the  elders  of  Ephesus,  and  in  short,  all  the 
preachers  and  teachers  of  the  apostolic  age, 
u2 


234  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

were  called  of  God,  and  by  him  appointed  to 
the  work  ;  and  in  the  absence  of  all  proof  to  the 
contrary,  we  are  bound  to  infer  that  such  a 
ministry  is  still  continued  in  the  church.  It 
remains,  then  for  Mr.  Campbell  to  prove  the 
negative  of  this  ;  to  show  from  Scripture  that 
the  Almighty  has  ceased  to  appoint  his  minis- 
ters, and  surrendered  that  prerogative  which  he 
exercised  in  the  first  age  of  the  church.  And 
until  this  is  done,  we  shall  consider  the  raillery 
and  satire  with  which  he  and  his  satellites  are 
in  the  habit  of  honoring  the  "  called  and  sent  ;'* 
and  all  their  assertions  and  presumings  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  has  called  no  man  to  preach,  since 
the  apostles  left  the  world,  as  abortive  and  in- 
significant, in  view  of  the  question  at  issue,  as 
was  the  weight  of  the  conceited  gnat  upon  the 
horn  of  the  ox. 

It  only  remains  now  for  us  to  examine  a  few 
objections  or  arguments  that  have  been  urged 
against  a  Divine  call  to  the  ministry. 

1.  Such  a  call  is  said  to  be  unreasonable,  be- 
cause those  who  profess  to  be  the  subjects  of  it, 
are  not  only  destitute  of  the  means  of  convinc- 
ing others,  but  sometimes  are  in  doubts  them- 
selves, whether  in  reality  they  have  received  it. 

The  first  member  of  this  objection  can  have 
no  bearing  upon  the  question,  because  the  fact 
assumed  is  not  true.  He  who  possesses  grace, 
gifts,  and  talents  for  usefulness,  who  lives  a 
blameless,  holy  life,  and  is  "  apt  to  teach," 
who  "  desires"  the  "  good  work"  of  a  minis- 
ter, and  in  whose  hands  "  the  sword  of  the 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  235 

Spirit*'  is  made  *'  the  power  of  God  unto  sal- 
vation," is  not  destitute  of  the  means  of  con- 
vincing others  of  the  Divine  reality  of  his  call. 
For  these  signs  and  qualifications  necessarily 
appertain  to  the  ministerial  character  as  set 
forth  in  the  Scriptures,  and  can  only  attend 
upon  him  whom  God  has  qualified  for  the 
work.  Nor  are  we  warranted  to  believe  that 
any  man  can  thus  preach  the  gospel  without 
this  Divine  authority.  Lecture  and  harangue 
the  people,  as  do  Mr.  Campbell's  proclaimers, 
he  may  ;  but  to  preach  "  Christ  Jesus,  and  him 
crucified,"  "  in  demonstration  of  the  Spirit, 
and  with  power,"  so  that  sinners  are  pierced 
to  the  heart,  and  brought  to  experience  the 
power  of  saving  grace,  is  wholly  beyond  his 
ability,  and  belongs  to  him  only  who  has  re- 
ceived "  power  from  on  high."  And  he  whose 
life  and  labors  manifest  the  presence  of  this 
*'  holy  unction,"  will  ever  carry  conviction  to 
the  minds  of  at  least  a  part  of  his  hearers,  that 
his  authority  is  Divine. 

Of  the  truth  of  the  second  part  of  the  objec- 
tion, we  have  no  doubt.  Gospel  ministers  may 
sometimes  be  in  doubt  as  to  the  reality  of  their 
call.  But  we  shall  not  admit  that  this  is  any 
argument  against  a  Divinely  constituted  minis- 
try ;  for  on  the  contrary,  it  appears  in  perfect 
accordance  with  man's  probationary  state,  in 
which  it  may  at  times  be  needful  for  him  to  be 
"  in  heaviness  through  manifold  temptations,'* 
and  in  which  God  may  lead  him  "  by  a  way 
that  he  knows  not."     That  the  child  of  God, 


236  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

in  some  dark  moment,  may  seriously  question 
his  acceptance,  cannot  admit  of  a  rational  doubt. 
To  this,  we  are  aware  Mr.  Campbell  demurs, 
and  assumes  that  christians  may  know  they  are 
washed  from  their  sins  so  long  as  they  remem- 
ber their  immersion ;  but  as  this  method  of 
proving  our  adoption  is  man's  work — being 
wholly  unknown  to  the  New  Testament — it 
only  shows  the  folly  of  that  system  of  which 
it  forms  a  conspicuous  part.  We  therefore  re- 
peat that  the  christian  may,  at  times,  be  led  to 
question  whether  he  has  been  "born  again;" 
but  does  this  fact  prove  that  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  the  new  birth  ?  Not  at  all.  And  yet 
it  might  be  urged  in  proof  of  this,  with  as  much 
plausibility,  as  can  the  fact  that  ministers  may 
have  doubts  of  the  reality  of  their  call,  to  prove 
that  God  has  never  called  them.  The  truth  is, 
that  in  either  case  the  evidence  of  its  reality, 
may,  in  some  instances,  be  attained  by  slow 
degrees,  and  in  point  of  clearness,  may  not  on- 
ly differ  in  different  individuals,  but  owing  to 
constitutional  temperament,  and  other  causes,  it 
may  at  different  times  vary  in  the  same  indi- 
vidual. But  still  the  work  is  of  God.  It  is 
his  Spirit  that  witnesses  to  the  believer,  that  he 
is  born  from  above,  and  it  is  the  Holy  Ghost 
that  moves  the  christian  minister  to  preach  the 
gospel.  And  whatever  doubts  may  arise  in  ei- 
ther case,  they  will  generally  be  removed  by 
searching  the  Scriptures,  self-examination,  and 
fervent  prayer.  In  proportion  as  the  christian 
walks  worthy  of  his  vocation,  and  advances  in 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  237 

holiness,  will  his  doubts  and  fears  decrease ; 
and  just  so  with  the  minister  of  the  gospel  in 
reference  to  his  call  to  the  work  of  an  evan- 
gelist. 

2.  But  in  the  next  place  we  are  told,  that  it 
is  absurd  to  suppose  that  God  would  call  such 
ignorant  and  illiterate  men,  a«  are  many  of  the 
professedly  "  called  and  sent,"  to  teach  others 
the  way  of  salvation.     We  shall  by  no  means 
contend  that  all  who  profess  a  Divine  call  to  the 
ministry,   are    in    reality  thus   called.     There 
were  false  teachers  even  in  the  apostles'  days, 
and  there  are  such  still.     Some,  from  sinister 
motives  may  have  been  led  to  a.ssume  the  live- 
ry of  heaven,  while  others,  in  engaging  in  the 
work,  may  be  honestly  mistaken;  but  in  both 
cases,  they  lack  the  most  essential  qualification, 
and  their  deficiencies  will  ultimately  be  discov- 
ered by  others,   if  not   by  themselves.     And 
whether  such  be  ignorant  or  learned  in  refer- 
ence to  literary  attainments,  the  result  is  the 
same.     Nor  shall  we  offer  any  apology  for  ig- 
norance in  the  christian  minister,  by  supposing 
that    the    Almiglity  consecrates  stupidity  and 
blindness  of  mind  to  his  service.     In  the  first 
age    of   Christianity,  we    are     aware    that    he 
"chose  the  weak  things  of  this  world  to  con- 
found the  mighty,"  but  this  was  in  the  day  of 
miracles ;  and  though  he  may  still,  in  some  in- 
stances, act  upon  the  same  principle,  we  have 
no  reason  to  believe  that  this  principle  prevails 
in  the  present  day,  to  the  extent  that  it  did  in 
the   infancy   of  Christianity.     Ignorance    and 


238  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

blindness  of  mind  are  the  effects  of  sin  ;  and 
as  the  minister  wars  with  sin,  he  should  espe- 
cially labor  to  free  his  own  mind  from  its  para- 
lyzing effects.  In  short,  he  should,  he  must 
have  a  theological  education.  But  on  this  sub- 
ject we  must  needs  explain.  By  the  education 
spoken  of,  we  do  not  mean  an  academic  initia- 
tion into  scientific  theology  ;  nor  will  we  admit 
that  the  real  usefulness  of  ministers  bears  a 
general  sort  of  proportion  to  their  classical  at- 
tainments, or  to  the  external  advantages  they 
may  have  enjoyed ;  though  such  attainments, 
so  far  from  being  disreputable,  or  unworthy  the 
attention  of  the  minister,  may  greatly  assist  him 
in  his  work.  The  education  to  which  we  re- 
fer, is  nothing  else  than  a  comprehensive 
knowledge  of  the  Bible — a  thorough  acquaint- 
ance with  the  scheme  of  salvation  through  a 
crucified  Savior,  as  set  forth  in  the  Scriptures. 
In  addition,  we  care  not  how  much  literary  and 
scientific  knowledge  may  be  possessed.  The 
more,  the  better,  if  judiciously  used  to  advance 
the  great  object  of  preaching — but  still  with- 
out these,  the  minister  may  be  extensively  use- 
ful in  his  vocation.  Let  him  be  taught  in  the 
school  of  Christ,  and  by  industry  and  intense 
application,  by  "  watchings,  fastings,  and  tribu- 
lations," by  faith  and  spirituality,  and  indiffer- 
ence to  the  world,  and  above  all,  by  fervent, 
effectual  prayer,  have  acquired  a  deep  and  ex- 
tensive knowledge  of  Revealed  Truth  ;  and 
this  is  all  the  theological  education  which  we 
consider  absolutely  indispensable.    But  is  there 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  239 

any  justice  in  designating  such  a  one  as  an  ig- 
norant man?"  By  no  means.  It  is  true  his 
literary  acquirements  may  extend  but  Uttle  be- 
yond the  bare  competency  to  read  the  EngUsh 
Bible  ;  and  yet  on  theological  questions,  and 
on  experimental  and  practical  religion,  he  may 
be  fully  competent  to  instruct  even  Alexander 
Campbell. 

The  objection  now  under  consideration,  haB 
been  very  current  among  the  teachers  of  Mr. 
Campbell's  gospel.  Nor  is  this  at  all  marvel- 
ous, for  their  leader  set  the  example  by  ridi- 
culing the  idea  that  men  so  destitute  of  literary 
attainments  as  to  have  no  theoretical  knowl- 
edge of  their  mother  tongue,  should  profess  to 
be  called  of  God  to  preach,  and  his  followers 
of  course  had  to  echo  the  same  sentiment.  We 
once  heard  a  proclaimer  laboring  upon  this 
point,  who  took  occasion  to  observe  that  he 
pitied  the  ignorant  enthusiast,  who  could  stand 
in  the  pulpit  and  say,  "  Wo  is  me  if  I  preach 
not  the  gospel ;"  and  we  recollected  to  have 
seen  the  same  proclaimer  some  years  before,  in 
the  pulpit  as  a  Baptist  preacher,  and  to  have 
heard  him  say,  "  Necessity  is  laid  upon  me; 
yea,  wo  is  me  if  I  preach  not  the  gospel." 
And  we  could  but  think  that  he  had  taken  an 
excellent  method  to  convince  the  public  of  his 
want  of  consistency.  Formerly  he  averred  in 
the  most  positive  manner,  that  God  had  called 
him  to  preach,  and  now  he  as  positively  declar- 
ed that  he  never  received  any  such  call ;  and 
surely  the  man  who  could  thus  contradict  him- 


240  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

self,  should  not  be  astonished  if  an  intelligent 
community  should  consider  him  as  either  de- 
fective in  understanding",  or  in  point  of  moral 
honesty.  Nor  is  this  the  only  inconsistency 
involved  in  the  objection  before  us  ;  for  even  if 
it  was  plausible,  it  comes  with  very  ill  grace 
from  those  who  urge  it.  However  deficient  in 
point  of  intelligence  some  of  the  professedly 
"  called  and  sent"  may  be,  they  have  certainly 
not  monopolized  all  the  ignorance  of  the  day. 
The  teachers  of  Campbellism,  numbers  con- 
sidered, have  at  least  an  equal  proportion  of  this 
commodity.  On  this  point  we  have  been  an 
attentive  observer  some  years,  and  should  it 
ever  be  found  expedient  to  immortalize  that  de- 
nomination of  professed  christians,  whose  teach- 
ers possess  the  lowest  amount  of  literary  and 
theological  information,  we  hazard  nothing  in 
saying  that  Campbellites  will  stand  a  good 
chance  to  live  for  ever.  If  then,  tliat  want  of 
intelligence  which  they  charge  upon  the  minis- 
ters of  Christ,  be  such  as  to  disqualify  them 
for  preaching,  and  thus  to  render  their  call 
questionable,  must  not  the  teachers  of  the  "  an- 
cient gospel,"  with  the  same  amount  of  igno- 
rance, be  equally  incompetent  ?  Or  does  it  re- 
quire a  less  amount  of  information  to  qualify  a 
man  to  become  a  teacher  of  religion,  without  a 
Divine  call,  than  with  one  ?  Let  the  reader 
judge. 

3.     In  the  third  place,  a  special  call  to  the 
ministry  is  declared   to  be  incredible,  because 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  241 

of  the  contradictory  doctrines  of  those  who 
equally  profess  to  have  received  it. 

This  objection  is  pretty  much  of  a  piece  with 
another  statement  from  the  same  source.  Mr. 
Caflipbell  has  said,  and  no  doubt  all  of  his  pro- 
claimers  have  reiterated  it,  that  the  preachers 
of  the  various  sects  preach  different  gospels. 
But  neither  this  assertion,  nor  the  above  objec- 
tion, can  be  received  without  considerable 
abatement.  Arminicusand  Calvinists,  Church- 
men and  Dissenters,  with  all  the  various  de- 
nominations that  are  considered  evangelical,  not 
only  preach  the  same  gospel,  but  so  far  as  its 
essential  features  are  concerned  they  preach 
the  same  doctrines.  While  they  differ  con- 
cerning church  government,  external  ceremo- 
nies, the  extent  of  the  atonement,  and  other 
things  of  less  importance,  so  far  as  to  justi- 
fy their  sectional  divisions,  they  all  unite  in 
proclaiming  the  same  Lord  and  Savior,  "  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh,"  and  the  merits  of  his 
death,  as  the  only  ground  for  the  sinner's  hope 
of  pardon,  and  justification  by  faith,  and  regen- 
eration and  sanctification  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  in  ascribing  all  the  glory  of  man's  salva- 
tion alone  to  God.  Hence  the  different  sects  so 
much  abused  by  Mr.  Campbell,  preach  substan- 
tially the  same  fundamental  doctrines,  and  en- 
tirely the  same  gospel,  while  he  it  is  that  stands 
aloof,  differing  from  them  all,  and  proclaiming 
*'  another  gospel."  And  thus  Mr.  Campbell 
and  his  little  party  are  found  arrayed  upon  one 
side,  and  against  them   the  fearful  odds  of  the 

11  V 


242  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

Bible,  and  all  the  evangelical  sects  of  Protest- 
ant Christendom. 

But  still  the  above  objection  is  urged,  and 
we  are  asked,  "  If  men  are  called  to  preach, 
why  do  they  not  speak  the  same  language,  and 
hold  forth  precisely  the  same  doctrines  V  The 
reason  is  obvious — they  are  not  inspired.  If 
they  were  inspired  to  inform  the  world  of  doc- 
trines not  previously  revealed,  we  might  ex- 
pect an  entire  unity,  so  far  as  those  doctrines 
were  concerned  ;  but  even  then  they  might  dif- 
fer in  reference  to  other  matters.  Such  differ- 
ences in  reality  obtained  among  the  apostles. 
Paul  withstood  Peter  to  the  face,  insisting  that 
he  was  to  blame  ;  and  Paul  and  Barnabas  dif- 
fered in  judgment  and  separated.  And  though 
they  preached  "  one  Lord,  one  faith,  and  one 
baptism,"  they  expressed  themselves  in  lan- 
guage and  manner  so  different,  that  we  will 
venture  to  say,  the  most  absurd  tenet  that  has 
been  countenanced  by  any  respectable  denomi- 
nation of  christians  in  modern  times,  may  find 
as  much  apparent  support  in  some  isolated 
texts  of  their  writings,  as  can  the  leading  fea- 
tures of  Mr.  Campbell's  system  in  any  portion 
of  the  Scriptures.  But  neither  the  various 
methods  used  by  the  apostles  in  detailing  those 
doctrines  in  which  they  were  perfectly  agreed, 
nor  those  differences  in  judgment  that  actually 
existed  among  them,  furnish  any  reason  to 
question  their  inspiration ;  and  certainly  the 
difference  of  views  among  ministers  of  the 
present  day,  upon  points  of  minor  importance, 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  243 

not  aftecting  the  sure  foundation,  can  be  no  evi- 
dence that  they  are  not  sent  of  God. 

4.  Another  objection  to  a  Divinely  consti- 
tuted ministry,  is  the  absence  of  miraculous 
gifts. — "  You  say  that  God  has  called  you  to 
preach,"  says  Mr.  Campbell,  "  work  a  mira- 
cle, and  we  will  believe  you." 

This  objection,  in  some  sense,  forms  the  ba- 
sis of  all  the  others  ;  and,  no  doubt,  is  the  prin- 
cipal source  of  error  in  leading  to  a  rejection 
of  the  ministerial  call.  To  confound  the  work 
of  the  minister  with  the  v/orking  of  miracles, 
or  to  suppose  that  the  preaching  of  the  gospel, 
and  miraculous  gifts  and  powers,  were  neces- 
sarily united,  and  always  appertained  to  the 
same  individuals,  even  in  the  days  of  the  apos- 
tles, is  assuming  what  cannot  be  proved  from 
the  New  Testament ;  for  on  the  contrary,  that 
book  obviously  leads  to  a  different  conclusion. 
Both  women  and  men,  ordinary  members  of 
the  church,  in  some  instances,  prophesied  and 
were  favored  with  miraculous,  spiritual  gifts, 
though  never  called  or  s-et  apart  to  the  work  of 
the  ministry.  These  visible  and  extraordinary 
manifestations  of  the  power  of  God,  were,  it  is 
true,  first  imparted  to  the  apostles,  but  did  not 
necessarily  constitute  a  part  of  their  call  to 
preach,  being  given  to  convince  the  world  of 
the  truth  of  that  system  which  they  were  in- 
spired to  make  known.  And  as  this  object 
could  be  advanced  wherever  those  "  signs  and 
wonders"  were  seen  in  the  converts  to  that  sys- 
tem, it  is  not  only  reasonable  that  they  should 


244  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

be  imparted  to  others  than  the  apostles,  but 
clear,  from  some  parts  of  St.  Paul's  epistles, 
that  spiritual  gifts,  including  the  power  of  work- 
ing miracles,  were  actually  conferred  on  many 
of  the  primitive  christians.  Seeing,  then,  that 
these  extraordinary  gifts,  while  they  continued 
in  the  church,  were  not  confined  to  the  apos- 
tles and  preachers,  and  did  not  exclusively  ap- 
pertain to  the  ministerial  character,  it  is  certain- 
ly very  unreasonable  to  argue  that  the  want  of 
such  powers,  in  preachers  of  the  present  day, 
is  evidence  that  they  are  not  called  to  the  work. 
The  same  argument,  if  we  are  not  much  mis- 
taken, would  be  equally  as  successful  in  prov- 
ing that  there  is  not  at  present,  one  on  earth, 
who  believes  in  Christ ;  for  he  expressly  de- 
clared that  "  these  signs" — casting  out  devils,  • 
speaking  with  new  tongues,  and  healing  the 
sick — "  should  follow  them  that  believe.^'' 

At  the  first  propagation  of  the  gospel,  mira- 
cles were  necessary  ;  not  to  qualify  the  minis- 
ter to  deliver  his  message,  but  to  convince  his 
hearers  of  its  truth.  But  there  was  no  neces- 
sity for  their  continuance  beyond  that  period 
which  saw  the  Revelation  of  Jesus  Christ  com- 
pleted, and  his  religion  established  by  evidence 
that  rendered  it  unreasonable  to  doubt.  Hence, 
St.  Paul,  in  the  13th  chapter  of  1st  Corinthi- 
ans, plainly  declared  that  the  time  should  come, 
when  the  gift  of  tongues  and  of  prophesying 
should  "  cease  and  vanish  away,"  and  when 
this  period  arrived,  those  extraordinary  means 
of  spreading  the  gospel  were  taken  from  the 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  245 

church ;  hence,  the  necessity  for  miracles  ceased 
with  the  establishment  of  Christianity  ;  but  the 
necessity  of  evangelizing  the  world  by  the  or- 
dinary means  of  preaching  the  gospel,  did  not 
then  cease,  nor  can  it  while  there  remains  an 
impenitent  sinner  upon  earth.  It  is,  therefore, 
certain  that  the  calling  of  men  to  the  ministry 
has  been,  and  must  be  perpetuated. 

5.  The  last  objection  or  argument  we  shall 
notice,  is  of  a  character  somewhat  different 
from  the  preceding ;  being  nothing  more  than 
the  declaration  of  those  who  oppose  the  idea 
of  the  existence  of  a  Divinely  constituted  min- 
istry, that  they  themselves  are  not  called. 

This  argument  has  been  much  in  vogue  a- 
mong  the  proclaimers  of  Campbellism.  One 
of  them,  some  years  ago  in  a  public  harangue, 
capt  the  climax  of  a  number  of  anti-call  argu- 
ments, by  assuring  his  hearers,  that  he  was 
neither  "  called  nor  sent  to  preach  !"  Upon 
which  a  drunk  man  in  the  congregation  instant- 
ly responded,  "  Then,  sir,  I  think  you  had  bet- 
ter sit  down."  Had  this  man  been  sober,  we 
doubt  whether  he  could  have  spoken  more  to 
the  point ;  for  certainly  it  argues  a  little  temeri- 
ty, for  any  man  to  be  constantly  endeavoring 
to  do  that  which  he  declares  he  has  no  authori- 
ty to  do.  But  to  return  to  the  argument.  We 
have  not  the  least  disposition  to  attempt  to  de- 
tract from  its  merits,  or  to  weaken  its  force. 
That  man  who  tells  me  he  is  not  called  to 
preach,  I  am  bound  to  believe  in  this  matter; 
but  to  infer  from  this  that  all  others  are  as  dee- 
v2 


246  CAJtfPBELLISM   EXPOSED. 

titute  of  a  call  as  he  is,  would  be  strange  logic. 
We  have  heard  of  an  honest  German  who 
thought  himself  fully  competent  to  prove  that 
there  was  no  such  city  as  London,  because  he 
had  crossed  the  ocean  and  never  seen  it.  But 
this  argument  instead  of  showing  the  non  ex- 
istence of  the  place,  only  proved  the  ignorance 
of  the  man.  And  so  it  ia  with  the  case  before 
us.  The  proclaimer,  who  declares  that  God 
has  never  called  him  to  minister  in  holy  things, 
leaves  entirely  untouched  the  question  of  the 
reality  of  such  a  call  in  other  cases,  while  he 
furnishes  pretty  conclusive  evidence  of  his  own 
incapacity  and  lack  of  authority  for  the  work 
in  which  he  is  engaged.  We  pray  that  all 
such  may  see  their  folly,  and  turn  from  the  er- 
ror of  their  ways,  lest  in  the  day  of  retribution, 
God  should  say  to  them  as  to  the  wicked, 
"What  hadst  thou  to  do  to  declare  my  statutes, 
or  to  take  my  covenant  in  thy  mouth  ?" 

Having  despatched  these  objections,  we  shall 
close  the  present  topic.  At  its  commencement 
we  expressed  the  conviction  that  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's opposition  to  the  ministerial  call  had  done 
much  injury  to  Christianity.  We  are  still  of 
the  same  opinion.  Whatever  tends  to  subvert 
the  established  order  of  the  church,  and  to  di- 
minish that  respect  and  regard  which  are  just- 
ly due  to  its  officers  and  their  work,  must  in  a 
ratio  proportionate  to  its  prevalence,  operate  to 
the  disadvantage  of  true  godliness.  And  who 
but  a  "  reformer,"  will  question  that  Campbell- 
ism  has  had  this  tendency  ?    That  God  has  set 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  247 

in  the  church  pastors  and  ministers,  selected 
by  him,  and  set  apart  "by  prayer  and  the  lay- 
ing on  of  hands,"  for  preaching  the  Word  and 
administering  the  ordinances,  cannot  be  ration- 
ally doubted  by  any  one  who  believes  the  Bi- 
ble, and  carefully  and  impartially  examines  its 
contents.  But  the  "  restorer  of  the  ancient  or- 
der," has  impiously  cast  all  these  aside,  de- 
claring that  God  does  not  specially  call  any 
man  to  this  work,  that  all  men  have  equal  au- 
thority to  preach,  to  baptize,  and  to  consecrate 
the  elements  of  the  Lord's  supper  ;  and  has 
thus  to  the  utmost  of  his  ability,  not  only  sub- 
verted all  "rule  and  authority"  in  the  church, 
but  greatly  detracted  from  that  sanctity  and  so- 
lemnity that  appertain  to  the  institutions  of  the 
Lord ;  and  even  joined  with  the  infidel  in  pour- 
ing contempt  upon  his  ministers  and  people. 
We  have  noticed  for  some  years  the  striking 
similarity  between  Mr.  Campbell  and  the  avow- 
ed enemies  of  Christianity,  in  regard  to  the  a- 
buse  and  ridicule  with  which  they  honor  the 
ministers  and  people  of  the  different  sects  of 
christians.  This  similarity  has  been  observed 
by  others  ;  and  in  one  case,  at  least,  it  came 
near  placing  a  devoted  "reformer"  in  rather 
an  unpleasant  attitude.  A  gentleman  of  our 
acquaintance  who  had  been  more  than  once 
honored  with  a  seat  in  the  legislature  of  Ken- 
tucky, became  a  convert  to  Campbellism  while 
it  was  yet  in  its  infancy.  After  some  years, 
he  was,  without  knowing  its  character,  induced 
to  subscribe  for  one  of  those  liberal  publics- 


248  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

tions,  that  advocate  the  most  barefaced  atheism, 
and  blaspheme  the  sacred  principles  of  virtue 
and  religion.     When  the  paper  came  to  hand,' 
he  was  greatly  delighted  in  reading  its  columns ; 
and  showed  it  to  som.e  of  his  brethren,  assu- 
ring them  that  it  was  an  excellent  auxiliary  in 
the  cause  of   the  "reformation."     But  they, 
having  more  knowledge  on  such  subjects,  dis- 
covered its  true   chai-acter,  and  informed  him 
that  the  editor  was  an  avowed  infidel.     "  An 
infidel,"  said  he,  "it  is  not  possible  !     Why, 
he   ridicules   the    sects,    and    preachers,    and 
priests,  and  priest-craft,  just  like  Mr.  Camp- 
bell."    And  indeed,  so  it  was.     The  champi- 
on of  this  modern  "  reformation,"  the  digger 
up  of  the  '•  ancient  gospel"  from  beneath  the 
accumulated  rubbish  of  centuries,  and  the  im- 
pious atheist,  were  found  using  the  same  weap- 
ons against  the  benevolent   institutions   of  the 
day,  and  in  opposition  to  the  piety  and  wisdom 
of  the  age.     We    do  not   mean,  however,  to 
charge  Mr.  Campbell  with  atheism.     Where 
he  may  land  in  future,  we  know  not,  nor  is  it 
our  province  even  to  guess ;  but  at  present,  we 
see  no  reason  to  suspect  him  of  any  bias  in  that 
direction.  And  yet  the  fact  above  stated,  cannot 
be  denied,  and  we  do  believe  that  his  principles 
and  practice,  in  reference  to  this  subject  alone, 
have  greatly  tended  "  to  strengthen  the  hands  of 
evil  doers,"  and  subvert  the  Scriptural  order  and  e- 
conomy  of  God's  church,  and  thereby,  done  mors 
injury  to  the  cause  of  Christianity,  than  every  re- 
deeming feature  of  his  "reformation,"  and  all  his 
talents  and  acquirements  are  likely  to  atone  for. 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  249 

CHAPTER  V. 

CONCLUSION. 

Mr.  Campbell's  dilemma  considered  respecting  the  opera- 
tion of  the  Spirit — bad  effects  of  Mr.  C.'s  doctrine  on 
this  topic — recapitulation  of  the  foregoing  chapters — 
concluding  remarks. 

The  Millennial  Harbinger  for  August  1835, 
contains  a  communication  in  relation  to  some  of 
our  remarks  that  seems  to  require  a  passing  no- 
tice, before  we  make  our  exit.  It  was  written 
from  James  Town,  Ohio,  by  one  who  appears 
to  be  as  thoroughly  Campbellized  as  any  other 
reformer.  We  do  not  notice  it,  either  because 
we  have  any  desire  to  engage  the  chivalrous 
writer,  or  because  we  consider  the  merit  of  his 
production,  to  require  any  attention  ;  but  for  the 
purpose  of  stating  distinctly  one  consequence  of 
Mr.  Campbell's  system,  to  which  we  do  not  re- 
collect to  have  adverted.  The  article  referred 
to  contains  the  following  sentences  ; — 

"  Now,  friend  Phillips,  answer  the  following 
question,  and  I  will  engage  to  place  you  be- 
tween the  horns  of  a  dilemma,  from  which  you 
cannot  extricate  yourself: — 

Is  the  belief  of  an  abstract,  or  direct  opera- 
tion of  the  Holy  Spirit,  necessary  in  order  to 
said  operation  9 

If  you  answer  in  the  affirmative,  then  away 
goes  your  position  ;  for  that  would  make  the  op- 
eration throughfaith,  and  not  direct  or  abstract, 
11* 


250  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

If  you  answer  in  the  negative,  then  why 
preach  the  necessity  of  believing  it,  seeing  that 
the  Spirit  operates  to  the  saving  of  men  without 
the  belief. 

You  have  wasted,  and  are  still  wasthig,  much 
time  in  preaching  and  writing  to  men  about 
that  which  will  do  them  no  good  ;  for  the  belief 
or  unbelief  of  the  thing,  does  not  alter  the  mat- 
ter. 

ICP"  Now  get  out  from  between  these  horns, 
if  you  can." 

The  writer  of  the  above  has  only  copied  and 
echoed  the  argument,  if  argument  it  may  be 
called,  of  his  file  leader,  Mr.  Campbell  had 
previously  assumed  the  same  ground,  and  his 
correspondent,  of  course,  considered  himself  in 
an  impregnable  fortress,  while  repeating  it. 
But  let  us  look  at  the  question.  "  Is  the  belief 
of  a  direct  operation  of  the  Hol)^  Spirit,  neces- 
sary in  order  to  that  operation  ?"  We  answer, 
no.  So  far  as  said  operation  is  necessary  to 
convince  the  sinner  of  sin,  the  work  will  be 
done,  even  though  he  should  disbelieve  the  ex- 
istence of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  for  one  object  for 
which  the  Spirit  was  given,  was  to  "reprove 
the  world  of  sin,  because  they  believe  not  ;'* 
from  which  declaration  of  the  Savior,  it  is  clear 
that  his  Spirit  operates  not  only  through  faith, 
but  upon  those  who  are  in  unbelief.  But  though 
men  are  irresistibly  convicted,  it  does  not  fol- 
low that  they  are  converted  in  the  same  man- 
ner ;  nor  does  the  admission,  that  sinners  are 
reproved  by  the  Spirit  in  the  absence  of  their 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  251 

belief  in  the  reality  of  his  operations,  drive  us 
to  the  necessity  of  supposing  them  regenerated 
and  sanctified  without  that  belief.  The  former 
is  plainly  taught  in  the  Scriptures  ;  the  latter 
we  have  no  authority  for.  The  first  operations 
of  the  Spirit  are  given,  to  arouse  the  sinner  and 
show  him  his  danger  ,  and  this  is  effected, 
either  with  or  without  the  existence  of  even 
the  faith  of  a  devil — and  if  he  attend  the  call, 
and  improve  the  grace  thus  imparted,  the  same 
Spirit  excites  and  aids  him  to  repent,  and  to 
exercise  that  faith — reliance  upon  a  crucified 
Savior — through  which  he  receives  pardon,  and 
is  restored  to  the  favor  of  God.  But  he  has 
power  to  "resist  the  Holy  Ghost,"  as  did  the 
Jews  of  old,  and  while  he  does  this,  either  by 
hardening  his  heart,  or  by  blasphemously  deny- 
ing the  existence  or  the  operations  of  the  Spirit, 
we  are  assured  that  there  is  no  hope  of  his  sal- 
vation. Where  then  are  the  horns  of  the  above 
dilemma?  They  have  lost  their  potency  ;  and 
indeed,  they  have  no  existence,  except  in  the 
imaginations  of  the  writer,  and  of  those  who, 
like  him,  have  become  "wise  above  that  which 
is  written."  We  have  no  difficulty,  however, 
in  accounting  for  his  mistake  in  this  matter. 
Every  thing  considered,  it  was  perfectly  natural 
for  him  to  suppose,  he  had  placed  us  between 
the  horns  of  an  inextricable  dilemma.  All  his 
notions  of  religion  had  been  derived  from  Mr. 
Campbell,  who  had  repeatedly  told  him  that  the 
views  of  the  ultra  Calvinist,  in  regard  to  the 
work  of  the  Spirit,  and  those  of  the  Arminian, 


252  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

resulted  in  the  same  conclusion;  and  as  the 
former  consider  the  work  of  regeneration  to  be 
effected  by  an  irresistible  operation  of  the  Spirit, 
the  latter,  of  course,  must  end  in  a  similar  con- 
clusion. All  this,  we  say,  Mr.  Campbell  had 
told  him — he  was  bound  to  consider  it  as  true  as 
the  ^'ancient  gospel,"  and  hence  the  origin  of  his 
imaginary  dilemma.  But  if  he  will  study  the  Bi- 
ble, place  less  dependence  upon  the  opinions  of 
his  leader,  and  make  himself  acquainted  Avith  the 
doctrines  of  the  Methodist  church,  we  venture 
to  guess,  that  he  will  not,  in  future,  attempt  to 
involve  an  Arminian  in  any  such  dilemmas. 

But  we  have  yet  another  reason,  and  one  of 
no  ordinary  weight,  for  endeavoring  to  teach 
and  defend  the  doctrine  of  Spiritual  influence. 
Connected,  as  it  is,  with  other  doctrines  and 
duties  of  vital  importance,  we  are  convinced 
that  its  rejection  cannot  but  lead  to  the  most 
direful  of  consequences.  Let  Mr,  Campbell's 
views  upon  this  subject  prevail — let  it  be  a  con- 
ceded point  among  christians,  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  only  operates  through  the  Word,  just  as 
the  thoughts  and  ideas  of  a  Locke  or  a  Newton 
are  conveyed  to  us  through  their  writings,  and 
if  it  does  not  render  prayer  an  unmeaning  cere- 
mony, and  ultimately  banish  it  from  the  earth, 
we  are  very  much  mistaken.  The  apostle 
taught,  that  prayers  should  be  made  for  all  men, 
because  God  would  have  all  men  to  be  saved. 
But  what  connection  can  exist  between  our 
prayers  and  the  salvation  of  sinners,  unless  in 
answer  to  them,  the  Holy  Spirit  convicts,  and 


jl 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  253 

brings  them  to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth? 
None  in  the  world.  Strike  this  doctrine  from 
the  christian  system,  and  we  shall  be  doomed 
to  see  our  unconverted  friends  perish  in  their 
sins,  without  the  privilege  of  entreating  the  Al- 
mighty in  mercy  to  turn  them  from  the  error 
of  their  ways.  And  another  unavoidable  con- 
clusion will  be,  that  prayer  for  Spiritual  blessings 
of  any  description,  is  wholly  useless  and  unne- 
cessary to  the  christian  character.  It  will, 
therefore,  follow,  that  men  instead  of  praying 
*'  without  ceasing,"  will  cease  to  pray  ;  and 
thus  the  most  important  of  christian  duties,  be 
driven  from  the  world.  Here  we  must  land, 
if  we  surrender  the  teachings  of  the  Spirit, 
or  consider  its  influence  as  synonymous  with 
moral  effects  of  the  written  Word.  All,  it  is 
true,  who  make  this  surrender,  may  not  immedi- 
ately be  led  to  look  on  prayer  as  a  vain  thing,  and 
to  abandon  its  performance ;  for  the  opinions  and 
practice  of  some  are  happily  inconsistent ;  but 
the  prevalence  of  such  principles  must  tend  to 
weaken  our  hold  on  prayer,  and  to  produce  an 
imaginary  independence  of  the  Divine  Being. 

These  are  the  natural,  and  to  some  extent, 
the  unavoidable  fruits  of  Mr.  Campbell's  doc- 
trines ;  and,  as  such,  are  already  visible  among 
his  followers.  Some  of  his  teachers  ridicule 
prayer  in  many  of  their  discourses,  and  occa- 
sionally, if  not  uniformly,  dispense  with  it  in 
Jtheir  public  congregations  ;  and  all  of  them,  so 
lar  as  we  have  information,  teach  the  penitent 
that  it  would  be  not  only  useless,  but  blasphe- 
W 


264  CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED. 

mous  for  him  to  pray  for  pardon — that  he  has 
nothing  to  do  but  be  immersed  ;  and  the  result 
of  such  teachings  have  made  professed  chris- 
tians— zealous    Campbellites — who    acknowl- 
edge they  have  no  practical  acquaintance  with 
the  duty  under  consideration — who  confess  they 
have  never  prayed  on  any  occasion,  public  or 
private  ;    and  who    seem    to   glory  in  having 
found  a  religion  that  does  not  require  the  cross 
bearing  of  any  such  burdensome  ceremonies. 
Now  it  is  not  contended  that  every  Campbellite 
has  gone  to  this  extreme,  but  it  is  confidently 
asserted  that  some  have,  and  firmly  believed, 
that  in  so  doing  they  have  only  carried  out  their 
system  of  doctrines  to  its  legitimate  results.    In 
regard  to   the  duty  of  prayer,  Antinomianism 
and  Campbellism  after  starting  at  points  as  far 
asunder  as  the  north  from  the  south  pole,  meet 
upon  a  common  level.     The  former,  by  teach- 
ing that  God  saves  men  irresistibly,  and  even 
against  their  wills,  forbids  the  penitent  to  ask 
that  he  may  receive  mercy,  and  renders  prayer 
under  any  circumstances  wholly  useless ;  and 
the  latter  by  assuming,  that  the  Lord  Jesus,  af- 
ter finishing  the  work  of  redemption,  left  his 
Spirit  in  his  Word,  and  has  nothing  farther  to 
do  in  converting  sinners,  arrives  at  the   same 
conclusion.     And  here  each  has  exalted  itself 
against   the  truth — and  that  too  upon  a  point 
of   the  most   vital  importance.      The   Scrip- 
tures, both  by  precept  and  example,  abundantly 
teach  the  pardon  of  sin  in  answer  to  prayer,  as 
well  as  persevering  in  that  duty  in  order  to  eter- 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  255 

nal  salvation,  while  they  give  us  no  reason  to 
believe  that  ever  a  prayerless  sinner  was 
pardoned  or  saved;  but  Campbellism  open- 
ly proclaims  that  sinners  are  pardoned  with- 
out one  word  of  prayer,  and  by  necessary 
consequence  from  the  principles  assumed, 
that  their  final  salvation  is,  in  no  sense,  de- 
pendent upon  the  performance  of  this  duty. 
And  this  is  the  legitimate  fruit  of  that  notion 
concerning  spiritual  influence,  against  which 
our  labors  have  been  directed.  Such  a  doctrine 
is  God  dishonoring  and  soul  destroying  in  its^' 
tendency.  It  is  calculated  to  make  "  blind  lea-''^ 
ders  of  the  blind,"  and  to  induce  whoever  re- 
ceives it  to  cry  "  peace,  peace,"  while  there  is 
no  peace,  and  to  expect  salvation  in  a  way  that 
God  has  never  ordained.  And  yet,  in  oppos- 
ing this  doctrine,  we  are  gravely  told,  that  we 
are  "preaching  and  writing  to  men  about  that 
which  will  do  them  no  good — -that  the  belief, 
or  unbelief  of  the  thing  does  not  alter  the  mat- 
ter." Mr.  Campbell  and  his  correspondent, 
may  think  to  involve  us  in  dilemmas,  such  as 
the  above,  and  talk  of  the  inutility  of  correctly 
understanding  the  doctrine  of  Divine  influence, 
as  taught  in  the  Bible,  as  much  as  they  please. 
Such  things  may  pass  very  well  with  those  who 
look  upon  the  bishop  of  Bethany  as  an  oracle  ; 
but  we  have  little  fear  that  they  will  be  much 
lauded  by  men  of  sound  judgment,  and  correct 
Bible  information. 

We  now  proceed  to  sum  up  and  present  in  a 
condensed  form  the  positions  and  arguments  of 


256  CAMPEELLISM    EXPOSED. 

the  foregoing  essays.    A  very  brief  recapitula- 
tion is  all  that  can  be  given. 

In  the  progress  of  these  essays  we  have  exam 
ined  the  principal  features  in  the  superstructure 
of  the   Campbellite  reformation,  commencing^ 
with  its  foundation  stone,  baptismal  regenera 
tion,  which  we  found  among  the  rubbish  of  the-' 
papal  apostasy,  and  after  testing  its  claims  by 
the  Word  of  God,  discovered  it  to  have  no  other 
authority  than  the  erroneous  interpretation  of 
some  four  or  five  isolated  texts ;  while  some 
hundreds  of  passages  were  found  to  teach  a  di- 
rectly contrary  doctrine — remission  not  by  wa- 
ter, but  hj  faith.  And  knowing  that  Mr.  Camp- 
bell does  not  extend  this  blessing  to  those  who 
have  received  baptism,  according  to  the  ordina- 
ry understanding  of  the  import  of  that  ordi- 
nance, but  confines  it  to  those  who  have  been 
immersed,  we  patiently  investigated  every  pas- 
sage of  Scripture  that  seems  to  have  any  bearing 
upon  the  mode  of  baptism,  and  found  no  proof 
that  Jesus  Christ  ever  commanded  immersion, 
or  that  the  apostles  practiced  it  in  one  solitary 
instance.     The  conclusion,  therefore,  at  which 
we  have  arrived,  is,  that  Mr.   Campbell  has 
made  the  soul's  salvation,  to  depend  upon  the 
performance  of  an  ordinance  in  a  mode  that  is, 
at  least,  of  questionable  authority.     But  how- 
ever this  be,  we  have  proved,  that  the  object 
for  which  he  administers  baptism,  and  the  effect 
he  ascribes  to  it,  are  contrary  to  the  views  of 
every  christian  denomination  among  us,  wheth- 
er Baptist  or  otherwise ;  that  with  him  immer- 


I 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  257 

sion  and  regeneration  are  synonymous  terms, 
so  that  no  one  can  be  bom  of  God  until  he  is 
immersed  ;  and  that  these  views  are  opposed  in 
common  by  Baptists,  Methodists  and  Presbyte- 
rians, and   have  no  more  authority  from  Scrip- 

ure  than  the  fable  of  transubstantiation. 

We  have,  in  the  next  place,  inquired  for  the 
evidence  to  which  Campbellites  resort  as  proof 
of  their  being  in  a  state  of  favor  with  God,  and 
discvoered  it  not  to  vary  materially  from  the 
means  by  which  they  profess  to  have  obtained 
that  favor.  We  had  previously  found  immer- 
sion, with  them,  to  be  the  act  of  turning  to 
God,  and  now  we  discovered  them  referring  to 
their  immersion  as  evidence  that  they  had  turn- 
ed to  God  ;  and  contending  that  any  man,  who, 
historically,  believes  the  gospel  facts  and  goes 
dov/n  into  the  water,  is  regenerated,  and  may 
always  refer  to  that  circumstance,  as  proof  of 
his  justified  state.  We  then  looked  around  up- 
on those  who  had  passed  through  Mr.  Camp- 
bell's "regenerating  bath,"  and  found  scores 
and  hundreds,  not  only  continuing  to  "  wallow 
in  the  mire,"  but  whose  last  state  really  appear- 
ed worse  than  the  first.  It  therefore  appeared 
clear,  that  this  kind  of  evidence  was  not  to  be 
trusted  ;  for  if  immersion  proves  one  man  to  be 
a  child  of  God,  it  proves  every  immersed  per- 
son to  be  the  same  ;  but  many  of  these  are  still 
in  the  "  gall  of  bitterness  ;"  and  hence,  the  cir- 
cumstance of  having  been  buried  in  the  water, 
proves  no  man  to  be  a  christian.  And  upon 
opening  the  Bible,  we  found  it  fully  to  sustain 
w2 


258  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

this  conclusion ;  for  the  only  evidence  in  proof 
of  our  son-ship,  we  are  there  authorized  to  re- 
ly upon,  we  have  shown  to  be,  not  water,  but 
the  witness  of  that  Spirit  which  "  beareth  wit- 
ness with  our  spirit  that  we  are  the  children  of 
God."  And  as  Mr.  Campbell's  creed,  rejects 
this  kind  of  testimony,  and  substitutes  anoth- 
er, wholly  unknown  to  the  Scriptures,  and  that 
can,  in  no  case,  be  depended  upon,  we  found 
here  another  strong  reason  for  rejecting  his  sys- 
tem. 

The  next  feature  of  the  "  reformation"  that 
has  passed  in  review,  is  that  rejection  and  con- 
demnation of  creeds,  universal  among  Campbel- 
lites,  and  their  professed  exemption  from  secta- 
rianism and  party  spirit.  And  here  we  proved 
that  the  circumstances  of  the  case  render  creeds 
and  confessions  of  faith,  expedient,  if  not  abso- 
lutely indispensable  ;  and  that  their  existence, 
instead  of  necessarily  engendering  strife,  is  the 
most  likely  method  of  preserving  peace ;  and 
that'  it  cannot  be  otherwise  until  human  nature 
is  remodeled,  and  the  children  of  men  brought 
to  see  "  eye  to  eye."  On  this  subject,  it  was 
also  shown,  that  while  Mr.  Campbell  glories  in 
having  no  creed,  he  gives  evidence  in  his  own 
person,  that  "  great  men  are  not  always  wise  ;" 
because  he  has  a  creed  as  much  as  any  Metho- 
dist, Presbyterian,  or  Baptist ;  the  only  differ- 
ence, being,  that  theirs  is  printed,  and  may  be 
known  as  their  religious  belief,  while  his,  though 
scattered  through  his  writings,  and  proclaimed 
by  all  his  teachers,  has  never  been  printed  in  a 


CAMPBELLISM   EXPOSED.  259 

separate  form.  Here  too  his  anti-sectarian  pre- 
tensions were  examined,  and  found  to  be  so  ut- 
terly groundless,  that  while  he  professes  to  aim 
at  the  destruction  of  sectarianism,  it  would  be 
difficult  to  find  more  bigoted  and  furious  secta- 
rians than  he  and  his  party  ;  and  that  his  terms 
of  union  require  all  christians  to  receive  his 
yemi-papal  notions,  instead  of  the  pure  doctrines 
of  the  gospel ;  and  thys  he  would  destroy  secta- 
rianism, by  building  up  one  great  sect  under  his 
own  banners,  and  by  substituting  Campbellism 
for  Christianity.  This  we  found  to  be  the  ten- 
dency, and  we  honestly  believe  it  to  be  the  de- 
sign, of  all  his  labors  and  professions  to  promote 
a  union  among  christians. 

The  last  article  of  the  system,  to  which  our 
attention  has  been  directed,  is  its  rejection  of  a 
Divine  call  to  the  ministry.  On  this  point,  in 
addition  to  explaining  what  is  meant  by  such  a 
call,  and  meeting  the  principal  objections  urged 
against  it,  we  fully  proved  that  a  ministry  di- 
vinely appointed  did  once  exist  in  the  church, 
and  was  continued  down  to  the  close  of  the 
New  Testament.  And  upon  these  facts  we 
rested  the  controversy  ;  for  in  the  absence  of 
all  proof  that  this  ministry  has  been  taken  away, 
we  are  bound  to  infer  that  it  still  exists.  But 
this  proof  has  never  been  given,  nor  can  it  be. 
We  have,  therefore,  been  conducted  to  the  con- 
clusion, that  every  true  minister  of  Christ  is 
still  "  called  of  God  as  was  Aaron  ;"  and  that 
every  professed  proclaimer  of  the  gospel,  who 
acknowledges  he  never  received  this  call,  fur- 


260  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

nishes  proof,  not  only  of  a  heretical  creed,  but' 
of  his  total  lack  of  authority  for  what  he  profes- 
ses to  do. 

We  have  now  taken  a  rapid  survey  of  the  i 
leading  topics  to  which  our  essays  have  been 
devoted,  and  these  include  the  prominent  fea- 
tures and  pretensions  of  Mr,  Campbell's  system. 
Such  a  system,  we  consider  a  gross  caricature 
of  Christianity,  and  of  a  tendency  so  deleterious, 
that  every  good  man  ought  to  oppose  it.  For 
though  we  are  constrained  to  hope  that  these 
doctrines  exist  only  as  a  deteriorating  ingredient, 
in  the  minds  of  many  whose  lives  manifest  the 
presence  of  true  piety  ;  we  find  it,  at  times,  ex- 
tremely difficult  to  believe  that  Campbellism, 
in  its  full  and  perfected  form,  can  be  otherwise 
than  wholly  incompatible  with  experimental  re- 
ligion, and  genuine  Christianity.  Be  this  as  it 
may,  it  is  unquestionably  of  evil  tendency,  cal- 
culated to  lull  sinners  to  sleep,  and  induce  them 
to  rest  in  the  form  of  godliness,  while  they 
deny,  and  are  wholly  destitute  of  the  power. 

Since  these  essays  have  been  in  progress, 
we  understand  that  Mr.  Campbell  has  paid 
some  attention  to  them  through  the  Harbinger. 
What  his  strictures  have  been,  we  know  not. 
For  though,  in  the  habit  of  arrogating  to  him- 
self a  great  deal  of  fairness  and  fearlessness  in 
regard  to  his  opponents,  in  this  instance  he  did 
not  choose  to  favor  us  with  any  number,  or  ' 
numbers  of  his  Harbinger  in  which  our  remarks 
were  noticed.  We  do  not  mention  this,  how- 
ever, by  way  of  complaint,  but  only  to  let  the 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  261 

world  know  that  when  Mr.  Campbell  censures 
those  who  oppose  his  water  system,  for  failing 
to  furnish  him  with  copies  of  their  productions, 
that  he  condemns  in  others  what  he  practices 
himself.     Perhaps  if  his  remarks  had  fallen  in 
our  way,  we  might  consider  it  necessary  to  ex- 
tend our  essays  a  little  further ;  but  having  nev- 
er seen  them,  we  have  not  the  power  of  a  reply ; 
nor  do  we  much  regret  it.     For  in  this  case, 
we  presume,  he  has  not  departed  from  his  usual 
course,  as  a  controversialist,  which  we  consider 
to  savor  of  any  thing  else,  as  much  as  it  does  of 
candor  and  fair  reasoning.    His  ordinary  course 
has  been  to  evade  the  force  of  that  reasoning 
which  he  was  wholly  unable  to  refute,  either 
by  a  sweeping  contempt  of  those  who  use  it,  or 
by  charging  them  with  misrepresentation,  and 
endeavoring,  by  seizing  upon  some  incidental 
point,  to  call  off  the  mind  of  the  reader  from 
the  question  at  issue  ;  and  we  have  no  reason  to 
suppose  that  our  strictures  have  shared  a  diffe- 
rent fate.     Be  this  as  it  may,  we  feel  very  little 
anxiety  on  the  subject.     To  enter  the  arena  of 
controversy  with  the  great  champion  of  the 
"  ancient  order,"  or  with  any  of  his  little  cham- 
pions, is  entirely  beyond  our  ambition.     Had 
this  been  our  object,  it  might,  long  since,  have 
been  effected.     Even  during  the  publication  of 
these  numbers,  we  have  had  several  opportuni- 
ties of  "  changing  shots,"  with  some  of  the  ex- 
clusive gospel  teachers  of  the  day,  who  appeared 
to  be  full  of  fight,  and  anxious  for  the  conflict ; 
and  had  we  been  desirous  to  expose  them,  as 


262  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

individuals,  to  the  scorn  and  pity  of  an  intelli- 
gent community,  we  had,  and  still  have  ample 
means  at  command.  But  to  engage  them  seem- 
ed not  the  most  likely  method  of  eliciting  truth  ; 
and  as  it  would,  virtually,  have  called  us  off 
from  that  examination  of  Mr.  Campbell's  doc- 
trines which  was  our  object,  we  have  let  them 
pass,  and  kept  on  the  "  even  tenor  of  our  way." 
Our  object  is  now  accomplished.  What  we 
have  written  is  before  the  reader,  who  will, 
we  hope,  be  competent  to  judge  for  himself, 
whether  Campbellism  be  of  God  or  of  men. 
As  to  what  Mr.  Campbell  or  his  adherents  may 
think,  or  say,  in  relation  to  our  feeble  efforts, 
we  feel  very  little  solicitude.  Among  them  are 
individuals  whom  we  esteem  and  love.  To 
obtain  their  ill  will,  is  by  no  means  desirable  ; 
but  to  court  their  favor  at  the  expense  of  the 
truths  of  the  Bible,  would  render  .us  guilty  in 
the  sight  of  God,  and  contemptible  in  the  esti- 
mation of  all  good  men.  We  have  written 
from  a  sense  of  duty,  and  in  the  fear  of  God  ; 
and  let  them  speak  or  write  about  us  as  they 
may,  we  feel  a  clear  conscience,  and  so  far  as 
personal  or  party  ambition  and  vanity  are  con- 
cerned, are  not  aware  of  the  least  anxiety  of 
mind. 

We  are  now  about  to  take  leave  of  the  sub- 
ject. In  the  present  form,  we  shall  not  resume 
it ;  and  its  further  prosecution,  under  any  other 
form  is,  at  present,  a  matter  of  entire  uncertain- 
ty. We  take  no  delight  in  what  is  called  reli- 
gious controversy  ;  and  have  never  engaged  in 


CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED.  263 

it  except  when  convinced  that  the  cause  of 
truth  required  it.  Such  have  been  our  convic- 
tions on  the  present  occasion.  We  had  beheld 
doctrines  which  we  beheved  to  be  of  the  most 
dangerous  character,  taking  root  among  the 
people.  These,  rendered  doubly  seductive  by 
the  confident  manner  and  acknowledged  talents 
of  some  of  their  propagators,  had  spread  into 
diiferent  sections  of  the  west,  deluded  many 
souls,  and  were  leading  them  to  inevitable  ruin. 
This  system,  we  were  satisfied,  could  not  bear 
the  test  of  sober,  Scriptural  investigation  ;  and 
we  considered  it  our  duty  to  aid  in  setting  it 
before  the  world  in  its  true  colors.  A  sense  of 
duty,  therefore,  induced  us  to  commence  these 
strictures ;  and  numerous  assurances  that  our 
labor  was  not  in  vain,  from  various  individuals 
in  the  surrounding  states,  have  encouraged  us 
to  prosecute  the  subject  thus  far.  Throughout 
the  whole,  we  have  aimed  at  candor  and  fair- 
ness with  our  opponents.  That  we  have,  in  no 
instance,  given  a  slight  erroneous  coloring  to 
any  of  their  sentiments,  is  more  than  we  dare 
affirm ;  but  we  are  confident  that  this  has  been 
done  in  no  material  point,  and  know  that  we 
have  not  intended  it  in  any  matter,  however 
small.  And  if  through  ignorance,  or  hastiness, 
our  statements  should,  in  any  respect,  be  charge- 
able with  misrepresentation,  we  are  sorry  for  it ; 
and  shall  be  ready  to  correct  the  error,  whenev- 
er we  are  satisfied  of  its  existence.  But  in 
truth,  we  are  not  conscious  of  having  written 
any  thing  under  the  influence  of  that  sort  of  ag- 


264  CAMPBELLISM    EXPOSED. 

gravation  of  spirit,  that  would  be  likely  to  pro- 
duce exaggerated  statements.  With  Mr.  Camp- 
bell and  his  partisans,  as  individuals,  we  have 
no  quarrel.  We  bear  them  no  malice,  and  wish 
them  no  evil,  but  all  possible  good.  We  do 
not,  however,  expect  their  friendship.  Experi- 
ence, long  ago,  taught  us  that  many  of  them  do 
not  soon  forgive  those  who  expose  their  doc- 
trine ;  and  that  they  are  ever  ready  to  cry  out, 
'<  persecution,  and  misrepresentation."  To  such 
a  charge,  we  shall  plead,  not  guilty ;  but  hope 
to  bear  it  unmoved.  With  us,  it  is  a  small 
thing  to  be  judged  of  men.  We  are  conscious 
of  our  approach  to  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ, 
and  under  this  consciousness  have  we  written. 
A  few  years  more,  and  all  controversy  with  us, 
and  our  opponents,  will  be  lost  in  the  grave. 
The  light  of  eternity  will  unfold  the  truth.  And 
whatever  the  result  may  be,  we  have,  so  far  as 
honesty  of  purpose  is  concerned,  no  fear  of  the 
scrutiny  of  that  Day,  in  regard  to  one  thought 
or  sentence  we  have  written,  concerning  Mr. 
Campbell,  his  doctrines  or  his  followers.  Our 
prayer  is  that  we,  our  opponents,  and  all  our 
readers,  may  know  the  truth  and  do  it,  and  be 
prepared  for  spending  an  eternity  free  from  er- 
ror, sin  and  suffering. 


THlfe  END. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Introduction  of  the  subject — Mr.  Campbell's  doctrine  of 
Baptism  stated — Texts  brought  to  support  Campbell- 
ism  considered,  viz.  Acts  ii.  38.  Jo.  iiL  5.  &c.  Mark 
xvi.  16.  1  Pet.  iii.  21.  Titus  iii.  21 Page  15 

CHAPTER  n. 

FAITH. 

Introduction — literal  meaning — Baptism,  prayer  and  con- 
fession as  conditions  of  justification — ^justification  by 
faith  alone — ^justifying  faith  as  combining  rehance  and 
trust  with  assent — faith  as  connected  with  pardon  does 
not  include  Baptism  or  other  works — faith  of  Abraha- 
ham  considered — objections  against  the  doctrine  of 
faith  as  the  condition  of  justification 35 

CHAPTER  HI. 

DIVINE  AGENCY— THE  SPIRIT. 

Campbellism  rejects  Divine  Agency  on  the  heart — in 
connecting    Remission  with   Baptism,   like    Roman 
Catholicism,  it  contradicts  Paul — it  enjoins  an  impossi- 
ble term  of  Salvation — Campbellite  doctrine  of  Assu- 
17  X  265 


266  CONTENTS. 

ranee — fallacy  of  inferring  our  Acceptance  from  our 
, .  Baptism — cases  Exemplifying  the  foregoing — Mr.  C. 
quoted — Irreverent  and  Blasphemous  language  of 
Campbellites  respecting  the  Spirit — Scripture  evidence 
of  his  direct  influence  on  the  heart — assurance  of  God's 
favor  by  the  Spirit — evangelical  Protestants  are  sub- 
stantially agreed,  on  this  point 77 

CHAPTER  IV. 

MODE  OF  BAPTISM. 

Import  of  the  Greek  word,  Baptizo — import  of  the 
phrases  In  Jordan,  going  np  out  of  the  ivater, — 
Baptism  at  ^^non — consideration  of  Rom.  vi,  3-6.  and 
Col.  ii.  12 — reasons  for  baptism  by  sprinkling — those 
baptized  on  the  day  of  Pentecost — the  jailor — St.  Paul 
— Cornelius — Reasons  against  immersion — Baptism  of 
the  Spirit — concluding  remarks  on  the  mode.  ...  120 

CHAPTER  V. 

CREEDS. 

Campbellites  profess  to  reject  all  creeds — creeds  do  not 
produce  sects — those  w^ho  use  creeds  do  not  equal  them 
to  scripture — uses  of  creeds — they  shew  in  what  sense 
scripture  is  received — they  promote  peace  and  harmo- 
ny— do  not  prevent  the  free  use  of  opinion — Camp- 
bellites have  a  creed 173 

CHAPTER  VI. 

SECTS— SECTARIANISM. 

Mr.  Campbell  imitates  the  Pope — Campbellism  peculiarly 
sectarian — a  dialogue — Campbellites  exceed  in  bigot- 
ry and  intolerance — They  idolize  their  leader — assume 
the  name  Refor?nevs — are  properly  Campbellites.  194 


CONTENTS.  267 

CHAPTER  VII. 

CALL  TO  THE  MINISTRY. 

Unchristian  sneers  of  Mr.  Campbell  on  this  subject — a 
call  defined — evangelical  christians  substantially  agreed 
on  this  point — the  true  call  lays  no  claims  to  inspiration 
or  miraculous  gifts — such  a  call  possible — necessary — 
prevailed  in  the  primitive  church — and  has  not  ceased 
— objections  ansvpered — mischievous  tendency  of  Mr. 
Campbell's  doctrine 219 

CHAPTER  VHI. 

CONCLUSION. 

Mr.  Campbell's  dilemma  considered  respecting  the  opera- 
tion of  the  Spirit — bad  effects  of  Mr.  C's.  doctrine  on 
this  topic — recapitulation  of  the  foregoing  chapters — 
concluding  remarks 349 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALI 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  TH 
STAMPED  BELO 


SBa 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


B     000  010  693     0 


